BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA PACKET

Monday, October 9, 2017 2:30 p.m.

Sonoma County Permit & Resource Management Department

2550 Ventura Avenue Santa Rosa, California

1

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA | 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA October 9, 2017 – 2:30 p.m.

Sonoma County Permit & Resource Management Department Planning Commission Hearing Room – 2550 Ventura Avenue, Santa Rosa, CA

1. Call to order the meeting of the Sonoma County Transportation Authority (SCTA) and the Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority (RCPA)

2. Public comment on items not on the regular agenda

3. Consent Calendar

A. SCTA/RCPA Concurrent Items 3.1. Admin – Minutes of the September 11, 2017 meeting (ACTION)*

B. SCTA Items 3.2. Measure M – Highway 101, Marin Sonoma Narrows Caltrans Cooperative Agreement 4-2213-

A7 (ACTION)* 3.3. Measure M – Highway 101, MSN-B2 Phase 2, PS&E Contract Amendment 3 SCTA13008-A3

(ACTION)* 3.4. Measure M – Measure M reporting letter status report 3.5. Admin – Resolution No. 2017-025 authorizing the purchase of prior public service for

employee members of the Sonoma County Employees Retirement Association (ACTION)*

C. RCPA Items 3.6. BayREN – amendments for the Bay Area Regional Energy Network contracts with the

Association of Bay Area Governments and with Frontier Energy, Inc. (ACTION)*

4. Regular Calendar

A. RCPA Items 4.1. RCPA Projects and Planning

4.1.1. CA2020 – Resolution No. 2017-002 to decertify the Environmental Impact Report for the Climate Action 2020 and Beyond plan (ACTION)*

4.1.2. CA2020 – next steps for climate action planning, including commitment to local government goals and measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (ACTION)*

4.1.3. Activities Report – (REPORT)*

B. SCTA Items 4.2. SCTA Planning

4.2.1. Travel Model – update to Administrative and Operational Travel Demand Modeling Guidelines (ACTION)*

4.2.2. Regional Fees – review of traffic mitigation fees and projects 4.3. SCTA Projects and Programming

4.3.1. Measure M – report out from the Measure M Ad Hoc Committee (REPORT)*

2

4.3.2. Highways – update on State Highway projects (ACTION)

http://scta.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/SR-37-Corridor-Plan-091817a.pdf

C. SCTA/RCPA Items 4.4. Shift – approve the Shift Sonoma County Low Carbon Transportation Plan (ACTION)* 4.5. Activities Report – Community Affairs Update – (REPORT)* 4.6. Admin – PUBLIC HEARING – FY17/18 Final Budgets

4.6.1. FY17/18 Measure M Final Budgets 4.6.2. FY17/18 Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) Final Budget 4.6.3. FY17/18 RCPA Final Budget 4.6.4. FY17/18 SCTA Final Budget

5. Reports and Announcements 5.1. Executive Committee report 5.2. Regional agency reports 5.3. Advisory Committee agendas* 5.4. SCTA/RCPA staff report 5.5. Announcements

6. Adjourn *Materials attached.

The next SCTA/RCPA meetings will be held November 13, 2017 Copies of the full Agenda Packet are available at http://scta.ca.gov/meetings-and-events/board-meetings/

DISABLED ACCOMMODATION: If you have a disability that requires the agenda materials to be in an alternate format or that requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this meeting, please contact SCTA/RCPA at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation.

SB 343 DOCUMENTS RELATED TO OPEN SESSION AGENDAS: Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the SCTA/RCPA after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the SCTA/RCPA office at 490 Mendocino Ave., Suite 206, during normal business hours.

Pagers, cellular telephones and all other communication devices should be turned off during the committee meeting to avoid electrical interference with the sound recording system.

TO REDUCE GHG EMISSIONS: Please consider carpooling or taking transit to this meeting. For more information check www.511.org, www.srcity.org/citybus, www.sctransit.com or https://carmacarpool.com/sfbay

3

BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING

Meeting Minutes of September 11th, 2017

1. Call to order the meeting of the Sonoma

County Transportation Authority (SCTA) and the Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority (RCPA)

Meeting called to order at 2:32 p.m. by Chair David Rabbitt.

Directors Present: Director Rabbitt, Supervisor, Second District, Chair; Director Russell, City of Cloverdale, Vice Chair; Director Agrimonti, City of Sonoma; Director Coursey, City of Santa Rosa; Director Gorin, Supervisor, First District; Director Gurney, City of Sebastopol; Director Landman, City of Cotati; Director Mansell, City of Healdsburg; Director Miller, City of Petaluma; Director Okrepkie, Town of Windsor; Director Zane, Supervisor, Third District.

Directors Absent: Director Salmon, Town of Windsor

2. Public comment on items not on the regular agenda

Steve Birdlebough, Sonoma County Transportation and Land Use Coalition, shared a recent travel experience on Highway 12, commenting on the amount of wineries in Sonoma County and lack of public transportation. Mr. Birdlebough advocated on the idea that more public transportation needs to be provided, not just for those who are transit dependent, but also for tourist who will visit the wineries.

Duane DeWitt, Roseland, spoke on “big, empty busses,” in which in order to permit a development project, a bus stop is required. The premise of the story was to highlight the idea

services are being placed in areas where they are not maximized and urged the Board of Directors to critically assess public transportation to determine which areas can be full maximized.

3. Consent Calendar

A. SCTA/RCPA Concurrent Items 3.1. Admin – Minutes of the March 27,

2017 meeting (ACTION)*

B. RCPA Items 3.2. Admin – sign on to the Under 2

MOU (ACTION*) 3.3. Admin – sign on to Country

Climate Coalition (ACTION)* C. SCTA Items

3.4. Measure M – Fulton Road amendment to cooperative agreement and appropriation request (ACTION)*

Duane DeWitt, Roseland, presented to the Board of Directors an agenda packet for the Roseland School District Board meeting, where an item regarding Safe Routes to School (SRTS) will be discussed. Mr. DeWitt expressed his support for SRTS, and noted the safety challenges facing Roseland.

The consent calendar was approved unanimously, following a motion by Director Miller, and a second by Director Landman.

4. Regular Calendar

A. SCTA Items 4.1. SCTA Planning

4

4.1.1. Activities Report – Update on SCTA planning activities (REPORT)

Janet Spilman updated the Board on SCTA’s recent activities. First, the Shift Sonoma County report has been reviewed by SCTA Staff and is currently under public review. Secondly, the Sonoma County Department of Health Services will present on Safe Routes to School (SRTS) as SCTA will assume implementation of the program.

Additionally, innovative transportation programs, such as ZipCar and bike sharing programs, are in progress, while data management and modelling efforts continue to maintain the accuracy of the travel model.

Vice Chair Russell expressed interest in SRTS, commenting that many families live in small homes and face a challenge of where to store bicycles. Vice Chair Russell also noted other factors that interfere children from using SRTS, such as parents feeling their children are not safe when walking or bicycling to school, high traffic volume, and/or too many unrecognizable people. There are also time factors that limits children from active transportation, whereas the commute to school will be longer if bicycling and walking and the need to reorganizing their morning routines.

Director Coursey wondered if usage data will be provided by ZipCar.

Dana Turrey responded that usage data will be provided after one month.

Director Mansell spoke highly of Shift Sonoma County, calling the document inspirational, and hopes the document will be given the deserved credit. Director Mansell expressed an interest to hear more of the document at the local level.

Suzanne Smith said to the Board of Directors that Shift Sonoma County has been presented in Cloverdale and is scheduled to present to the City of Sonoma. Staff is happy to give a presentation to other jurisdictions upon request.

4.2. SCTA Projects and Programming

4.2.1. Safe Routes to School – presentation by Department of Health Services (REPORT)*

Dana Turrey introduced Anthony Taylor, Sonoma County Department of Health Services, who reported the findings of Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program.

The report studies Fiscal Year (FY) 15/16 and FY 16/17. The final report will be available on the Department’s website beginning in October.

Major funders of the program are MTC’s One Bay Area Grant, with matching funds from Measure M and Kaiser Permanente.

Mr. Taylor described the program goals of increasing heath and air quality, and improving safety and security.

The program was updated this FY, with a focus on building capacity in the schools. The pilot project began in FY 2015-16 and was modified for FY 2016-17.

The program employs data driven planning, with a focus on school behavior data and traffic patterns.

Mr. Taylor further described the program’s framework: the “6 E’s,” which aims to encourages behavior change. The 6 E’s are: Education, Encouragement, Enforcement, Engineering, Evaluation, and Equity.

5

The Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition works in partnership to provide bicycle education to students, with examples as the International Walk & Roll to School Day and providing education on bicycling during rainy days. As well, infrastructure improvements and pedestrian crossing signs were installed to improve safety.

The program cost $1.2 million for 29 schools with over 15,000 students reached across Sonoma County.

Mr. Taylor further described the data collected.

Data was collected at four points during the year. The last presentation to the SCTA Board of Directors, a 3% decrease in bicycling was seen; currently, the data shows no further decrease in bicycling, however no increase was seen. Although there is an increase in the number of students who participated in walking and biking to school, more schools were added, thus demonstrating a small change.

Bicycling increased for fifth and sixth grade students by 16% respectively.

Mr. Taylor noted challenges with collecting data from the schools, suggesting a self-selection bias and self-reporting.

Moving forward, the program plans to provide value to schools, continue to employ data-driven planning, evaluate efficacy of activates, frequently measure travel habits, increase sample size in the local high schools, and further study disadvantaged schools.

Mr. Taylor was available for questions.

Director Miller asked for more information on how schools are reporting and/or tracking the data.

Mr. Taylor responded that students of each grade are asked, “How did you get to school today?”

These questions were asked at the beginning and end of the school year and student’s answers are tallied. Furthermore, high school students were given surveys.

Surveys asked students whether they had bicycles at home, whether the bicycles were functioning, and how many have helmets at home.

Director Miller followed up by wondering if schools are required to track how students arrived to school through the year, rather than at the beginning or end of the school year.

Mr. Taylor responded that schools are asked, “Are you tracking (the data through the school year)?” The assessment does not explain how the data is tracked, however.

Director Coursey commented that commuters know the hurdles of school traffic. Distance is the reason people do not walk/bike, especially inter-district transfer students, and trying to encourage active transportation involves a cultural shift.

Mr. Taylor noted that an average of 60% of students live within walking/biking distance, which varies to one-quarter mile for elementary school students to one mile for high school students.

Director Agrimonti commented an organization called Team Services in the City of Sonoma provides parking bicycles for the Tuesday market. Director Agrimonti wondered if there is an incentive for the organization to contact SRTS to arrange a bicycle repair day for the students.

Mr. Taylor responded the Center for Climate Protection and the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition works to connect other organizations to repair bicycles for children, and any other organizations wishing to be connected are encouraged to contact Mr. Taylor, Center for

6

Climate Protection, or the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition.

Director Zane expressed appreciation for the program, and conveyed the importance of the media in promoting this program. Director Zane suggested more positive press is needed to combat the safety fears of children bicycling.

Director Gurney thanked Mr. Taylor for the detailed presentation and real data points and suggested to the Board that numbers are increasing due to active involvement by law enforcement.

Director Gorin commented on the International Walk & Roll to school by suggesting this activity breaks the misperceptions of biking/walking to school. If more Walk and Roll to School days are sponsored throughout the year, then this can encourage high participation in bicycling and walking to school.

Director Okrepkie noted that the Town of Windsor does not have neighborhood schools, in which the majority of students are carpooled in; thus skewing the data collected. A realistic view in Windsor, in terms of the data, ought to be derived from junior- and high schools.

Vice Chair Russell expressed the importance to understand the elements of why children who walk and bicycle to school, and further suggested to receive the information from the young people. Vice Chair Russell also spoke of the need for parent involvement: the students and parents can help provide insight on the reasons why they choose, or do not choose, to walk and bicycle to school.

Director Mansell recalled her experience as an educator who has administered this program in the school and highlighted the morning routine. The common theme seen is the students need to

see a stronger meaning to wake up earlier in the morning to aid in the cultural change. Students want to see the bigger picture and be involved with change; however, in order to show this change, more walking and bicycling to school days to expose students to this lifestyle should be promoted.

Chair Rabbitt provided commentary and thoughts, recalling walking to school as a student in elementary school, and expressed appreciation for data presented.

Chair Rabbitt opened for public comment.

Duane DeWitt, Roseland, commented on the necessity to fix the bike paths and greenways, especially in Roseland, to better serve the students in Roseland Elementary and Sheppard Elementary schools. Mr. DeWitt urged to the Board of Directors to advocate to complete the bicycle paths.

4.2.2. Funding - update on SB1 implementation and SB595 (Beall) related to Regional Measure 3 tolling proposal (REPORT)*

Suzanne Smith provided an update on transportation funding, specifically in regards to Senate Bill 1 (SB1). Fuel tax funding is expected to begin collection in November, while vehicle registration fees will be collected in January.

Through SB1 funding, several programs will either be created and/or receive additional funding. The California Transportation Commission (CTC) has been designated to develop the guidelines for these programs.

Active transportation the most straightforward in the guidelines, because an existing plan is already in place – SB1 allows for more robust funding.

7

The Local Streets and Road Program has a slightly different process than in the past. SCTA staff has been tracking these developments with local jurisdictions on what must be completed in order to submit projects to the CTC. The CTC will need to sign off on proposed projects.

The Solutions for Congested Corridors program is of interest to SCTA in regards to the Highway 101 corridor. The Highway 101 corridor was listed specifically in the legislation as an example of a multi-modal approach to relieving congestion.

SCTA and Transportation Authority of Marin are expecting to submit applications for the final segments of the Marin-Sonoma Narrows with construction anticipating to begin in the next fiscal year.

Director Landman wondered how quickly Marin will begin construction in the Narrows.

Ms. Smith responded depending on the Right-of-Way process, expected construction on the Marin side of the Narrows could begin in 2020.

Director Coursey referenced chart on page 45 in the agenda packet on SB1, and wondered how confident the figures are.

Ms. Smith responded the figures in the agenda packet are published by CALCOG, which are estimates received by the League of California Cities.

Director Mansell wondered how are the funding numbers are distributed.

Ms. Smith responded the formula is a combination of registration fees and population. 50% is based on population and 50% based on combination of lane miles and vehicle registration.

Ms. Smith also updated the Board of Directors on Regional Measure 3 (SB 595 - Beall).

SB 595 allows MTC and the Bay Area Toll Authority to place RM3 on the ballot to increase tolls up to $3 on the state owned bridges. In order to receive the funding, a nexus to the seven Bay Area bridges must be identified.

A handout was provided to the board with updated amendments on projects. The bill is still waiting to be voted on in the state Assembly.

Director Mackenzie, who also serves as the Chairman of MTC, commented on the previous regional measures, of which Sonoma and Napa Counties were not included, and described the July 26th commission meeting, where, among various topics, commissioners negotiated project funding figures. The commission voted 8-5 to move forward on the current project plan.

RM3 will be placed on the ballot in 2018, either in June or November, and is regarded as great importance for the four North Bay counties.

Director Gorin provided comments on the interest to have a regional conversation.

Director Miller inquired, if the measure is passed, whether the toll increase will take effect in January following the vote.

Director Mackenzie said BATA is responsible for collecting the tolls and there is an anticipation to start collecting in 2019.

Director Coursey inquired about the Santa Rosa community connector.

Ms. Smith responded the community connector could receive funds through SB1.

Director Coursey followed up by asking for clarification on the $100 million for North Bay transit improvements.

Ms. Smith answered the transit improvements are not fully explicit in the definition as of now.

8

4.2.3. Highways Report – update

on State Highway projects (ACTION)

James Cameron updated the Board of Directors on thehighway projects.

Mr. Cameron updated the Board on MSN B-3 construction, identified as the San Antonio Creek Bridge at Sonoma/Marin County Line. The bridge is anticipated to be completed by mid-November.

The project is on schedule to be completed by the end of 2018 with both northbound and southbound traffic on the new bridge, connector routes, and a Class 1 bicycle path.

Project 7, MSN B-2 (Petaluma River Bridge), has been officially accepted.

Project 11, MSN C-2A – sound wall construction along Highway 101 north in Petaluma. The plan is to take the sound wall project and implement with the MSN C2. This allows for stronger competition to receive project funding.

Project 12, MSN B-2 Phase 2, has achieved Ready to List status. The project will be advertised in late 2017, with construction commencing in late 2018.

The Highway 37 Policy Committee has been rescheduled to September 25th. The draft SR 37 Transportation and Sea Level Rise Corridor Improvement Plan will be discussed.

Chairman Rabbitt asked about the increases of off ramp traffic at the Petaluma Boulevard South exit.

Mr. Cameron responded Caltrans has officially noted that traffic has not increased.

Seana Gause reported on the Highway 116/121 intersection improvements. Caltrans is currently working with Parsons to respond to comments on the environmental document.

Director Gorin requested further information on the biological opinion from the US Fish and Wildlife Service.

Highway 116, Sebastopol to Cotati, project has awarded Ghilotti Construction to pave sections in two phases starting in downtown Sebastopol.

B. RCPA Items 4.3. RCPA Projects and Programming

4.3.1. Electric Vehicles – charging station permit streamlining update (ACTION)*

Carolyn Glanton spoke on efforts to streamline electric vehicle charging permits. Assembly Bill 1236 was passed in 2015, which requires streamlining of electric vehicle charging stations, and also includes an installation checklist. Permitting offices in each jurisdiction must provide resources online and to provide electronic submission.

RCPA staff has been working with Redwood Empire Association of Code Officials (REACO) to engage officials on the dialogue of this adoption, and have helped develop guidance for jurisdictions. The role of RCPA and REACO is to create communication and consistency among the jurisdictions. All of the jurisdictions in Sonoma County have adopted, or are in the process of adopting, the streamlining process.

AB 1236 requires jurisdictions to adopt the streamlining process by September 30th.

RCPA staff is available to help provide permit guides and to train permit staff.

Additionally, RCPA has been focused on Shift Sonoma County. In July, the RCPA Coordination Committee featured a presentation on Shift

9

Sonoma County Transportation Action Plan to jurisdictions and member communities.

Public feedback on Shift Sonoma County is accepted until September 17th.

Furthermore, the Climate Action Advisory Committee had their first meeting in July, in which the committee reviewed the charter and this fiscal year’s work plan.

Lauren Casey provided a legislative update.

C. Joint SCTA/RCP Items 4.4. Planning

4.4.1. Activities Report – Community Affairs Update (REPORT)*

Brant Arthur announced a workshop for Shift Sonoma County at the SCTA offices on September 14th, and surveys are available during the public comment period.

ZipCar is available for individuals who wish to utilize car sharing. Membership for the first year is free. The cars are parked at the old Railroad Square and on 5th Street by Russian River Brewing Company.

As well, Drive Evergreen is being promoted by the RCPA.

In response to Director Mansell’s question about development, and that builders must build to adopted laws, Lauren Casey noted inconsistencies in the laws, in which Climate Action 2020 was poised to help alleviate.

The Board convened into closed session at 4:54pm.

5. Closed Session (ACTION) – Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: California River Watch v. County of Sonoma, SCV-25942. (Gov. Code Sec. 54956.9(d)(1).)

The Board reopened into session at 5:20pm and reported out:

The Board authorized counsel and the Executive Director to enter into a settlement with California River Watch in which RCPA pays $226,912, comprised of $225,000 in attorney fees and $1,912 in costs, in two installment payments over two years. As further requirements of the settlement, RCPA would agree not to appeal, and California River Watch would reaffirm in signed correspondence on letterhead its commitment not to challenge the measures in the plan.

6. Reports and Announcements

6.1. Executive Committee report

N/A 6.2. Community Affairs Report

N/A 6.3. Regional agency reports

N/A 6.4. Advisory Committee Agendas

Included in agenda packet.

6.5. SCTA/RCPA staff report Included in the Agenda Packet.

6.6. Announcements N/A 7. Adjourn

The SCTA/RCPA Board of Directors meeting adjourned at 5:20 p.m.

10

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: Sonoma County Transportation Authority

From: James R. Cameron, Director of Projects & Programming

Item: 3.2– Highway 101 – Marin Sonoma Narrows Caltrans Cooperative Agreement 4-2213-A7

Date: October 9, 2017

Issue:

Shall the Board approve proposed Caltrans Cooperative Agreement Amendment 4-2213-A7 for right-of-way services needed to complete the Highway 101 Marin Sonoma Narrows (MSN) B2 and C3 contracts.

Background:

SCTA and Caltrans entered into two cooperative agreements with Caltrans (Coops 4-2213 and 4-2317) for right of way services for what are now the Marin Sonoma Narrows Contracts B2 and C3. Initially, the Contacts were named MSN B2 (Petaluma Boulevard South Interchange) and MSN B4 (Petaluma River Bridge and Lakeville Highway Interchange). After several rounds of funding and programming changes, the Petaluma River Bridge scope was added to MSN Contract B2 and the remaining Lakeville Highway Interchange scope was renamed Contract C3.

The MSN C3 project completed construction in December 2016 and the MSN B2 completed construction in June 2017. Both projects are currently finalizing project close out activities, including right-of-way engineering to set new property boundaries and to provide final mapping. In addition, the MSN B2 and C3 Contracts required the full or partial acquisition and/or temporary construction easements on thirty (30) parcels. Several of these parcels required eminent domain proceedings to obtain possession of the parcels which required an extensive amount of support by Caltrans to finalize the acquisition process. Caltrans estimates that an additional $500,000 is needed to complete the right-of-way support and engineering for MSN Contracts B2 and C3.

Coop 4-2317 was originally written for the MSN-B4 contract and is 100% funded by Measure M for right-of-way capital and support services. The Coop has been amended three times and currently provides budgets of $797,490 for capital costs ($615,000 to Caltrans + $182,490 to SCTA to buy wetland mitigation credits) and $571,876 for support costs ($271,876 to Caltrans + $300,000 SCTA). SCTA support cost was used for appraisal and acquisition agent services and legal services. After the last amendment to Coop 4-2317 it was agreed that all future Caltrans expenditures on MSN-B2 or C3 will be accounted for on Coop 4-2213.

Coop 4-2213 has been amended six times and currently provides $2,678,000 (100% Measure M funds) for right-of-way support and $15,939,000 ($915,000 Measure M) for right of way capital. Now that construction is complete, Caltrans has requested a budget increase of $500,000 to complete the right of way support and engineering services for the MSN B2 and C3 projects. Since the property acquisition which is funded by right of way capital is complete, it has been determined there are adequate funds remaining in the right of way capital budget to cover the additional right of way support need. This cooperative agreement will transfer $500,000 of Measure M funds from the right of way capital budget to the right of way support budget for a net zero increase in cost. The total Measure M funds for right of way support and right of way capital will remain the same ($3,593,000).

11

Policy Impacts:

None.

Fiscal Impacts:

Approval of Cooperative Agreement 2213-A7 will transfer $500,000 of existing Measure M right of way capital funds to right of way support. There will be no new financial impacts and the total Measure M funds for right of way support and right of way capital will remain the same.

Staff Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the Board authorize the Chair to execute the attached Amendment No. 7 to Cooperative Agreement 4-2213 increasing the budget for right-of-way support by $500,000 and decreasing the budget for right-of-way capital by $500,000, in substantially similar form as provided for in the attachment, subject to the final review and approval by legal counsel.

12

Resolution No. 2017-024 Sonoma County Transportation Authority

Santa Rosa, California October 9, 2017

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SONOMA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, COUNTY OF SONOMA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE CHAIR TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT 7 TO COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT 4-2213 FOR PS&E AND ROW FOR THE MSN-B2/C3 PROJECTS TO TRANSFER $500,000 OF EXISTING MEASURE M RIGHT OF WAY CAPITAL FUNDS TO RIGHT OF WAY SUPPORT.

WHEREAS, SCTA is authorized to provide Measure M funds for project development and construction of certain transportation projects though the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans); and; WHEREAS, Cooperative Agreement No. 4-2217 was previously executed with Caltrans and amended six times for the preparation Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E) and right of way capital and support services needed for the MSN-B2/C3 Contract at a cost not to exceed $7,957,000 in Measure M 101 Program funds; and WHEREAS, an additional $500,000 is needed to complete right of way support activities; and WHEREAS, it has been determined there are adequate funds remaining in the right of way capital budget to cover the additional right of way support need; and WHEREAS, right of way capital will be decreased by $500,000 and right of way support will be increased by $500,000; and WHEREAS, the total Measure M funds for right of way support and capital will remain the same. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Board of Directors of the Sonoma County Transportation Authority authorizes the chair to execute Amendment 7 to Cooperative Agreement 4-2213 with the California Department of Transportation, in substantially similar form as provided for in the attachment, subject to the final review and approval by legal counsel. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was moved by Director ___, seconded by Director ___, and approved by the following vote:

Director Agrimonti Director Mansell Director Coursey Director Miller Director Gurney Director Rabbitt Director Gorin Director Russell Director Landman Director Salmon Director Mackenzie Director Zane

Ayes: Noes: Absent: Abstain: SO ORDERED I, the undersigned, certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Sonoma County Transportation Authority held on October 9, 2017. ______________________________________ Suzanne Smith, Executive Director Clerk, Sonoma County Transportation Authority

13

04-SON-101-0.4/2.9 EA: 26408

District Agreement 04-2213-A7

PACT Version 9.1 3.31.08 1 of 5

AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT This AMENDMENT NO. 7 (AMENDMENT 7), entered into and effective on __________________________________, is between the State of California, acting through its Department of Transportation, referred to as CALTRANS, and

Sonoma County Transportation Authority, a public corporation referred to as SCTA.

RECITALS 1. CALTRANS and SCTA, collectively referred to as PARTNERS, entered into

Cooperative Agreement No. 4-2213 (AGREEMENT) on February 23, 2009, defining the terms and conditions for developing and financing a highway improvement project, referred to as PROJECT, consisting of an interchange at Petaluma Boulevard South and Route 101 and frontage road in Sonoma County.

2. PARTNERS entered into Amendment No. 1 to AGREEMENT on October 5, 2010, to reduce the amount that SCTA will be reimbursed for performing PS&E tasks from $250,000 to $118,000 and also to adjust the funding commitments for an overall increase of $2,925,000.

3. PARTNERS entered into Amendment No. 2 to AGREEMENT on July 26, 2011, to identify those R/W Support tasks that SCTA will perform and be reimbursed an amount of $50,000 and also to adjust the funding commitments for an overall increase of $2,200,000.

4. PARTNERS entered into Amendment No. 3 to AGREEMENT on October 20, 2011, to increase the amount SCTA will be reimbursed for performing R/W Support tasks from $50,000 to $100,000 and also to adjust the funding commitments with no change to the overall funding total.

5. PARTNERS entered into Amendment No. 4 to AGREEMENT on March 27, 2012, to increase the amount SCTA will be reimbursed for performing R/W Support tasks from $100,000 to $160,000.

6. PARTNERS entered into Amendment No. 5 to AGREEMENT on November 26, 2012, to adjust the funding commitments for an overall increase of $3,809,000 and also to provide $50,000 of Measure M for R/W Capital spending to SCTA for initial work necessary to prepare the Marin Sonoma Narrows (MSN) Corridor Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for Riparian Mitigation

14

District Agreement 04-2213-A7

PACT Version 9.1 3.31.08 2 of 5

7. PARTNERS also entered into Amendment No. 6 to AGREEMENT on March 26, 2014,

to increase the amount CALTRANS would be reimbursed for R/W Support. CALTRANS’ reimbursement increased under this Amendment by $778,000 paid with Measure M funding. Total R/W Support increased from $1,400,000 to $2,178,000.

8. PARTNERS now wish to enter into AMENDMENT 7 to revise the funding obligations on PROJECT. Under AMENDMENT 7, Local Funds (Measure) for R/W Capital will be decreased by $500,000 and Local Funds (Measure) for R/W Support will be increased by $500,000. The total Local Funds (Measure) for R/W Support and Capital will remain the same.

IT IS THEREFORE MUTUALLY AGREED:

9. The FUNDING SUMMARY of AGREEMENT, as amended under Amendment No.6 is

replaced in its entirety by FUNDING SUMMARY A-7, attached to and made a part of AMENDMENT 7, and any reference to the FUNDING SUMMARY in AGREEMENT is now deemed a reference to FUNDING SUMMARY A-7.

10. The SPENDING SUMMARY of AGREEMENT, as amended under Amendment No. 6, is replaced in its entirety by SPENDING SUMMARY A-7, attached to and made a part of AMENDMENT 7, and any reference to SPENDING SUMMARY in AGREEMENT is now deemed a reference to SPENDING SUMMARY A-7.

11. All other terms and conditions of AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect.

12. AMENDMENT is deemed to be included in, and made a part of, AGREEMENT.

CONTACT INFORMATION

The information provided below indicates the primary contact data for each partner to this agreement. PARTNERS will notify each other in writing of any personnel or location changes. These changes do not require an amendment to this agreement.

The primary agreement contact person for CALTRANS is: Wajahat Nyaz, Project Manager 111 Grand Avenue Oakland, California 94612 Office Phone: (510) 286-5119 Mobile Phone: (510) 715-6273 Email: Wajahat_Nyaz@dot.ca.gov The primary agreement contact person for SCTA is: James Cameron, Deputy Director Projects and Programming 490 Mendocino Avenue, Suite 206 Santa Rosa, California 95401 Office Phone: (707) 565-5377 Email: james.cameron@scta.ca.gov

15

District Agreement 04-2213-A7

PACT Version 9.1 3.31.08 3 of 5

SIGNATURES PARTNERS declare that:

1. Each PARTNER is an authorized legal entity under California state law. 2. Each PARTNER has the authority to enter into AMENDMENT 7. 3. The people signing AMENDMENT 7 have the authority to do so on behalf of their public

agencies. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION By:

Helena (Lenka) Culik-Caro Deputy District Director - Design

CERTIFIED AS TO FUNDS: By:

Jeffrey Armstrong District Budget Manager

SONOMA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY By:______________________________

SCTA Chair Attest:____________________________

SCTA Executive Director APPROVED AS TO FORM AND PROCEDURE By:______________________________

County Counsel

16

04-SON-101-0.4/2.9 EA: 26408

District Agreement 04-2213-A7

PACT Version 9.1 3.31.08 4 of 5

FUNDING SUMMARY A-7

Fund

ing

Sour

ce

Fund

ing

Part

ner

Fund

ing

Type

Des

ign

R/W

Cap

ital

R/W

Sup

port

Subt

otal

Su

ppor

t

Subt

otal

C

apita

l

Subt

otal

Fu

nds

Type

STATE SCTA STIP/RIP $0 $15,024,000 $0 $0 $15,024,000 $15,024,000 STATE CALTRANS TCRP $1,220,000 $0 $0 $1,220,000 $0 $1,220,000 LOCAL SCTA Measure M $4,364,000 $915,000 $2,678,000 $7,042,000 $915,000 $7,957,000

Subtotals by Component $5,584,000 $15,939,000 $2,678,000 $8,262,000 $15,939,000 $24,201,000

17

04-SON-101-0.4/2.9 EA: 26408

District Agreement 04-2213-A7

PACT Version 9.1 3.31.08 5 of 5

SPENDING SUMMARY A-7 Design (PS&E)

Right of Way Capital

Right of Way Support

Description Work Partner

assigned by Scope Summary

SCTA Measure M

RIGHT OF WAY (R/W) - 195, 200, 220, 225, 245, 255, 300, 999 CALTRANS $2,518,000

RIGHT OF WAY (R/W) - 225, 245 SCTA $160,000

TOTALS CALTRANS/SCTA $2,678,000

Description Work Partner assigned by

Scope Summary

CALTRANS TCRP

SCTA Measure M

PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND ESTIMATES (PS&E) - 240, 250, 999 CALTRANS $1,102,000 $0

PLANS , SPECIFICATIONS, AND ESTIMATES (PS&E) - 185, 230, 235, 255, 260, 999

SCTA $118,000 $4,364,000

TOTALS CALTRANS/SCTA $1,220,000 $4,364,000

Description Work Partner SCTA STIP/RIP

SCTA Measure M

Right of Way (RW) Capital CALTRANS $15,024,000 $865,000

Environmental Mitigation SCTA $0 $50,000

TOTALS CALTRANS/SCTA $15,024,000 $915,000

18

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: Sonoma County Transportation Authority

From: James R. Cameron, Director of Projects and Programming

Item: 3.3- Highway 101 – MSN-B2 Phase 2, PS&E Contract Amendment 3 SCTA13008-A3

Date: October 9, 2017

Issue:

Shall the SCTA Board approve the proposed URS Corporation (a subsidiary of AECOM) Amendment SCTA13008-A3 for additional scope for the Plans, Specifications and Estimate (PS&E) phase of the Marin Sonoma Narrows (MSN) B2 Phase 2 – Sonoma Median Widening project?

Background:

The Highway 101 Marin Sonoma Narrows (MSN) project is an estimated $724 Million project (with escalation) to widen Highway 101 for High Occupancy Vehicles (HOV) from Route 37 in Novato to just south of Old Redwood Highway in Petaluma. To accelerate project delivery, SCTA, Caltrans, the Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM) have divided the project into more than a dozen projects.

The B2 Phase 2 project will add 4.0 miles of southbound and 4.3 miles of northbound High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes to US 101 from 0.6 miles south of the Marin/Sonoma County line (MRN 27.0) to 0.3 miles south of the East Washington Street Overcrossing in Sonoma County (SON 4.5). The HOV lanes will end before the proposed northbound lane drop north of Lakeville Highway (SR 116 East) and the proposed southbound lane drop 0.5 miles south of the Marin/Sonoma county line resulting in 8.8 miles of a full width 3rd lane and 8.3 miles of Highway 101 HOV lanes.

On May 14, 2012, the SCTA Board of Directors authorized re-programming of East Washington project's Federal Earmark savings for the design of MSN B2 Phase 2. The Board also authorized staff to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) in order to select a qualified design firm to do the design work. Staff issued an RFP on May 25, 2012, but was forced to reject all proposals in July 2012, due to an unexpected change in the Federal Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program which is required for all contracts with Federal funds.

On November 30, 2012, SCTA and Caltrans entered into Cooperative Agreement 4-2462, which is necessary to define the roles and responsibilities and allocate the $2,642,000 budget between SCTA and Caltrans. In accordance with Coop 4-2462, SCTA was assigned a budget of $2,492,000 for the design of the project. The remaining $170,000 budget was assigned to Caltrans to prepare the right of way certification and for the final PS&E packaging necessary to advertise the project for construction.

On January 4, 2013, SCTA issued a new RFP to select a qualified design firm to provide PS&E services for the MSN B2 Phase 2 project using the new Federal requirements. On January 25, 2013, four firms submitted proposals. On February 14, 2013, a panel consisting of SCTA and Caltrans staff interviewed two of those firms. Based on the proposals and interviews, the panel selected URS Corporation as the most qualified firm to provide the necessary PS&E services. URS Corporation has provided SCTA with PS&E services for the successful delivery of the Highway 101 Central-A, Central-B, MSN-B2, and MSN-C3 contracts.

19

On March 11, 2013 the Board authorized the SCTA Chair to execute the original agreement with URS for MSN B2 Phase 2 PS&E Services (SCTA13008) for a not to exceed amount of $2,492,000. The effective date for the original agreement is August 8, 2013 with a not to exceed amount of $1,982,972 for a 24-month term.

On October 20, 2014 URS submitted a 100% design package but could not finalize the design until construction funding is identified, therefore the project design was put on hold. URS was asked to provide design details for Caltrans to explore amending the existing environmental permits in lieu of the lengthier new permit process and ensure the project is as shovel ready as possible.

On August 6, 2015 URS and SCTA Executive Director executed Amendment #1 to SCTA13008 that was ratified by the SCTA Board on September 14, 2015 for a three-year time extension which extended the term to August 7th, 2018.

On February 6, 2017, the SCTA successfully secured the final funding needed to construct the MSN B2P2 Project. A summary of the funding plan for the construction of the project is as follows:

Local - Measure M $15.2 million

Federal - MSN Earmark Savings $0.8 million

Federal - Re-purposed earmark $15.0 million

State - TCIF (Prop 1B) $3.0 million

Federal - STP/CMAQ 1.0 million

Total $35.0 million

With construction funding secured, SCTA proceeded to finalize the design of the previously shelved MSN B2P2 project.

On March 27, 2017, the Board authorized the SCTA Chair to execute Amendment No. 2 to SCTA13008 with URS to address additional scope changes increasing the total compensation by $445,155 from $1,982,972 to $2,428,127, and an 18-month time extension for the completion of PS&E, design services during construction which extended the term from August 7, 2018 to February 8, 2021.

Since that time, URS is aggressively pursuing the final delivery of PS&E to Caltrans. The project is scheduled to have Caltrans advertise the construction contract in late 2017 and start construction in early 2018. To meet the aggressive delivery schedule, an additional amendment is required to address contract scope changes that were not originally anticipated.

The changes in scope include:

• Two additional PS&E submittals to Caltrans that were not originally anticipated due to changes in standards

• Developing a hydromodification mitigation plan required to obtain the 401 permit from the Regional Water Quality Control Board

• Performing additional structural analysis for one soil-nail retaining wall requested by FHWA

• Performing additional plan revisions to address revised standards issued by Caltrans on July 21, 2017

20

• Preparation of a conceptual Storm Water Prevention Pollution Plan to allow the contractor to begin work 15 calendar days after notice to proceed, rather than the standard 55 calendar days

• Additional coordination with other ongoing MSN projects including MSN C2, MSN B3, and corridor landscape projects

SCTA staff has reviewed these contractual scope changes and agrees that although they are within the scope of the project as intended, they are beyond the scope of work approved in the contract. The estimated budget for the additional scope is $232,251. In addition, additional budget is needed in order to complete design services during construction in the amount of $396,000 for a total increase of $663,873. SCTA staff recommends the approval of this amendment increasing the total compensation by $663,873 from $2,428,127 to $3,092,000.

Policy Impacts:

There are no policy impacts associated with the recommendations.

Fiscal Impacts:

The funds for this amendment are from a Federal Earmark for the Marin Sonoma Narrows. The contract is 100% federally funded using toll credits in lieu of a non-federal match. The total contract value remains within the contract budget for the PS&E phase ($2,492,000) plus an additional $600,000 of federal funds from the construction phase to be used to perform the design services during construction for a total not to exceed amount of $3,092,000.

Staff Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the Board authorize the Chair to execute the attached Amendment No. 3 to Contract SCTA13008 with URS Corporation (a subsidiary of AECOM) increasing the budget for PS&E by $232,251 and the design services during construction by $396,000 for a total not to exceed amount of $3,092,000, in substantially similar form as provided for in the attachment, subject to the final review and approval by legal counsel.

21

Contract No. SCTA13008-A3

Page 1 of 4

AMENDMENT NUMBER 3 TO AGREEMENT FOR PS&E CONSULTANT SERVICE

This Agreement is made by and between URS Corporation, a Nevada Corporation, dba URS Corporation Americas (hereinafter referred to as “CONSULTANT”), and the Sonoma County Transportation Authority (hereinafter referred to as “SCTA”).

RECITALS WHEREAS, SCTA and CONSULTANT entered into Contract Number SCTA13008 for CONSULTANT to provide design services for MSN Project B2 Phase 2 in Sonoma County; and

WHEREAS, Contract Number SCTA13008 included a Professional Scope of

Services (Exhibit A), Preliminary Project Schedule (Exhibit B), and Budget by Work Task (Exhibit C); and

WHEREAS, SCTA and CONSULTANT entered into Amendment 1 to Contract

Number SCTA13008 to update the Project's Term of Agreement; and, WHEREAS, SCTA and CONSULTANT entered into Amendment 2 to Contract

Number SCTA 13008 to add additional scope and budget and to update the Project’s Term of Agreement; and, WHEREAS, in the judgment of SCTA’s Board of Directors it is necessary and desirable to add compensation and scope for project delivery and construction advertisement now that construction funding has been identified and to meet an aggressive project delivery schedule.

OPERATIVE PROVISIONS

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals set forth above and the covenants contained herein, CONSULTANT and SCTA mutually agree as follows:

2. Amendment 1 to Exhibit A, URS Professional Scope of Services, of

Agreement SCTA13008-A2 is hereby supplemented with Amendment 2 to Exhibit A, URS Professional Scope of Services.

3. Exhibit B, Preliminary Project Schedule, of Agreement SCTA13008-A2 is

hereby replaced in its entirety with Amendment 2 to Exhibit B, Project Schedule.

4. Exhibit C, URS Budget by Work Task, of Agreement SCTA13008 is

hereby replaced in its entirety with Amendment 2 to Exhibit C, URS

22

Contract No. SCTA13008-A3

Page 2 of 4

Budget by Work Task. 5. Provision 2.1, Payment for Consultant Services, of Agreement

SCTA13008-A2 is hereby replaced in its entirety by the following amended Provision 2.1:

PAYMENT FOR CONSULTANT’S SERVICES: For all services required hereunder (including without limitation, all tools, equipment, labor, supplies, subcontracts, sub-consultants, supervision, and materials), CONSULTANT shall be paid for salary expenses in accordance with the hourly rates specified in Amendment 2 to Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and for non-salary expenses in accordance with paragraph 2.2. Consultant shall be paid at the specific rates of compensation shown in Amendment 2 to Exhibit C and paragraphs 2.2 and 2.3, provided, however, that Consultant agrees to perform all services described in this Agreement for an amount not to exceed $3,092,000. The hourly rates specified in Amendment 2 to Exhibit C shall cover all salary-related costs, including, without limitation, salary, fringe benefits, overhead, and profit. In no event will the CONSULTANT be reimbursed for overhead costs at a rate that exceeds SCTA’s approved overhead rate set forth in the Cost Proposal. CONSULTANT may request its hourly rates be increased by a percentage amount not to exceed actual percentage raise given to employees annually. Such request must be made at least 30 days prior to requested new rate effective date and not more often than once a year beginning with the second year of service.

6. Provision 7, Prosecution and Progress, of Agreement SCTA13008 is

hereby replaced in its entirety by the following amended Provision 7:

PROSECUTION AND PROGRESS: CONSULTANT shall be authorized to proceed with the performance of this Agreement upon the issuance by SCTA’s Executive Director of written Notice to Proceed. However, and notwithstanding the foregoing, CONSULTANT shall not perform any work under Task 10 as described in Amendment 1 to Exhibit A until the issuance by SCTA’s Executive Director of a separate written Notice to Proceed for Task 10. Performance of the services hereunder shall be completed within the times or by the dates specified in Amendment 2 to Exhibit B. SCTA shall notify CONSULTANT in writing of any event requiring CONSULTANT to stop work hereunder. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT shall

23

Contract No. SCTA13008-A3

Page 3 of 4

immediately stop work and shall not resume work until notified in writing by SCTA. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for managing contract time and completing all deliverables in accordance with Amendment 1 to Exhibit A, Amendment 2 to Exhibit A and Amendment 1 to Exhibit B.

7. Except to the extent the Agreement is specifically amended or

supplemented hereby, together with exhibits and schedules is, and shall continue to be, in full force and effect as originally executed, and nothing contained herein shall be construed to modify, invalidate or otherwise affect any provision of the Agreement or any right of SCTA arising there under.

8. CONSULTANT warrants the person affixing his or her signature hereto is authorized to execute this agreement on behalf of CONSULTANT

SCTA AND CONSULTANT HAVE CAREFULLY READ AND REVIEWED THIS

AMENDMENT AND EACH TERM AND PROVISION CONTAINED HEREIN AND, BY EXEUTION OF THIS AMENMENT, SHOW THEIR INFORMED AND VOLUNTARY CONSENT THERETO. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment Number 1 to agreement SCTA13008 as set forth below. CONSULTANT DATED: By: _______________________________________

Consultant

SONOMA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY DATED: By: ________________________________ Chair, SCTA CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE ON FILE WITH AND APPROVED AS TO SUBSTANCE BY SCTA: DATED: By: ________________________________ Suzanne Smith, Executive Director, SCTA

24

Contract No. SCTA13008-A3

Page 4 of 4

APPROVED AS TO FORM: DATED: By: _______________________________________ SCTA Counsel

25

September 15, 2017

Contract Number: SCTA13008-A3

Amendment 2 to EXHIBIT A

URS Corporation

Professional Scope of Services

For

Marin-Sonoma Narrows (MSN) B2 Phase 2 Project

26

Son-101-PM 0.0/2.6 MSN B2 Phase 2

Page 1 of 1

SCOPE OF SERVICES Introduction This amendment to the scope of services dated February 21, 2017, by URS Corporation (CONSULTANT) is specifically based to provide Sonoma County Transportation Authority (SCTA) with professional design services for final Plans, Specifications and Estimate (PS&E), bid support and design services during construction support for the Marin-Sonoma Narrows (MSN) – B2 Phase 2 project (Project). The following is amended to Task 7 of the Scope of Services dated February 21, 2017:

• TASK 7. Final PS&E (RTL)

Added review of comments and preparation of a 1st Revised Final PS&E submittal to Caltrans District (Roadway, Electrical and Highway Planting) and Caltrans DES OSFP (Structures)

Added review of comments and preparation of a 2nd Revised Final PS&E submittal for structures only to Caltrans DES OSFP

Added PS&E details to achieve 100% hydromodification mitigation on-site requested by the RWQCB in order to issue the 401 Certification

Added review of comments by the FHWA on the 2nd Revised Final PS&E submittal for structures and preparation of independent structure calculations on one soil-nail retaining wall using the FHWA’s latest publication “Geotechnical Engineering Circular 7 – Soil Nail Walls”, dated February 2015

Added post RTL revisions to the PS&E to incorporate revised standards issued by Caltrans on July 21, 2017

Added task to prepare a conceptual SWPPP and coordinate with Caltrans for review and approval. Revise PS&E to incorporate the use of the Conceptual SWPPP that allows the contractor to begin work 15 calendar days after Notice to Proceed, rather than the standard 55 calendar days.

Added task to coordinate with various MSN corridor projects in the final design or construction phases to ensure compatibility with the construction of the MSN B2 Phase 2 project. Task work includes preparing for, and attending, coordination meetings, reviewing design and construction drawings for other corridor MSN projects, providing design and construction phasing advise, reviewing construction schedules, and, as needed, revising, the PS&E for the MSN B2 Phase 2 project.

Deliverables

The CONSULTANT will submit the following added Task 7 deliverables:

• 1st Revised Final PS&E (Roadway, Electrical, Highway Planting and Structures) • 2nd Revised Final PS&E (Structures only) • Post RTL Revised Final PS&E for Project Advertisement • Conceptual SWPPP

27

ID Task Name Duration Start Finish

1 Task 1: Project Management 1120 days Thu 8/1/13 Wed 11/15/172 Notice to Proceed 0 days Thu 8/1/13 Thu 8/1/133 Project Management Activities 1120 days Thu 8/1/13 Wed 11/15/1745 Task 2: Planning, Prelim & Final Investigations 920 days Thu 8/1/13 Wed 2/8/176 Data Collection and Review 40 days Thu 8/1/13 Wed 9/25/137 Topographic Mapping Review 20 days Thu 8/1/13 Wed 8/28/138 Supplemental Field Survey 40 days Thu 8/29/13 Wed 10/23/139 Utility Coordination 900 days Thu 8/29/13 Wed 2/8/171011 Task 3: Preliminary Engineering (35%) 100 days Thu 8/1/13 Wed 12/18/1312 Geotechnical / Haz Mat Field Investigation 40 days Thu 8/1/13 Wed 9/25/1313 Structure Type Selection 40 days Thu 9/26/13 Wed 11/20/1314 Prepare 35% PS&E Documents 80 days Thu 8/1/13 Wed 11/20/1315 Submit 35% PS & E Documents 0 days Wed 11/20/13 Wed 11/20/1316 Agency Review 20 days Thu 11/21/13 Wed 12/18/131718 Task 4: Final PS&E (65%) 90 days Thu 12/19/13 Wed 4/23/1419 Review/Reconcile Agency Comments 10 days Thu 12/19/13 Wed 1/1/1420 Prepare 65% PS&E Documents 60 days Thu 1/2/14 Wed 3/26/1421 Submit 65% PS & E Documents 0 days Wed 3/26/14 Wed 3/26/1422 Agency Review 20 days Thu 3/27/14 Wed 4/23/142324 Task 5: Final PS&E (95%) 102 days Thu 4/24/14 Fri 9/12/1425 Review/Reconcile Agency Comments 10 days Thu 4/24/14 Wed 5/7/1426 Prepare 95% PS&E Documents 44 days Thu 5/8/14 Tue 7/8/1427 Submit 95% PS&E Documents 0 days Tue 7/8/14 Tue 7/8/1428 Agency Review 48 days Wed 7/9/14 Fri 9/12/142930 Task 6: Final PS&E (100%) 51 days Mon 9/15/14 Mon 11/24/1431 Review/Reconcile Agency Comments 10 days Mon 9/15/14 Fri 9/26/1432 Prepare 100% PS&E Documents 16 days Mon 9/29/14 Mon 10/20/1433 Submit 100% PS&E Documents 0 days Mon 10/20/14 Mon 10/20/1434 Agency Review 25 days Tue 10/21/14 Mon 11/24/143536 Task 7: Final PS&E (RTL) 294 days Mon 10/3/16 Thu 11/16/1737 Prepare Final Bid Package 80 days Mon 10/3/16 Fri 1/20/1738 Submit Final PS&E Documents 0 days Fri 1/20/17 Fri 1/20/1739 DCC (Draft Contract Comments) 40 days Mon 1/23/17 Fri 3/17/1740 DR (District Response) 20 days Mon 3/20/17 Fri 4/14/1741 DCR (Draft Contract Ready) / Incorporate Permit

Requirements69 days Mon 5/15/17 Thu 8/17/17

42 RTL (Ready to List) 5 days Fri 8/18/17 Thu 8/24/1743 Post RTL Work Activities 36 days Fri 8/25/17 Fri 10/13/1744 CTC Funding Appropriation Vote 4 days Mon 10/16/17 Thu 10/19/1745 E-76 Issued for Construction Phase 20 days Fri 10/20/17 Thu 11/16/174647 Task 8: R/W Engineering and Support 157 days Mon 12/26/16 Tue 8/1/1748 R/W Evaluation 157 days Mon 12/26/16 Tue 8/1/1749 R/W Certification 0 days Tue 8/1/17 Tue 8/1/175051 Task 9: Permit Applications and Obtain Permits 763 days Wed 6/11/14 Fri 5/12/1752 401-RWQCB Certification 763 days Wed 6/11/14 Fri 5/12/1753 Prepare and Submit Draft Application to Caltrans 36 days Wed 6/11/14 Wed 7/30/1454 Caltrans Review 30 days Thu 7/31/14 Wed 9/10/1455 Finalize Application and Submit to Caltrans 40 days Mon 11/28/16 Fri 1/20/1756 RWQCB Review and Issue Certification 80 days Mon 1/23/17 Fri 5/12/1757 1602-CDFW Agreement 763 days Wed 6/11/14 Fri 5/12/1758 Prepare and Submit Draft Application to Caltrans 36 days Wed 6/11/14 Wed 7/30/1459 Caltrans Review 30 days Thu 7/31/14 Wed 9/10/1460 Finalize Application and Submit to Caltrans 40 days Mon 11/28/16 Fri 1/20/1761 CDFW Review and Issue Agreement 80 days Mon 1/23/17 Fri 5/12/1762 404-ACOE Permit 763 days Wed 6/11/14 Fri 5/12/1763 Prepare and Submit Draft Application to Caltrans 36 days Wed 6/11/14 Wed 7/30/1464 Caltrans Review 30 days Thu 7/31/14 Wed 9/10/1465 Finalize Application and Submit to Caltrans 40 days Mon 11/28/16 Fri 1/20/1766 ACOE Review and Issue Permit 80 days Mon 1/23/17 Fri 5/12/1767 ACOE Wetland Delineation Map Updates 279 days Tue 12/1/15 Fri 12/23/1668 Field Work / Prepare Updated Maps 60 days Tue 12/1/15 Mon 2/22/1669 Prepare ACOE Applications for PJD 20 days Mon 8/29/16 Fri 9/23/1670 ACOE Prelim. Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) 65 days Mon 9/26/16 Fri 12/23/1671 MMP Updates 85 days Mon 8/29/16 Fri 12/23/1672 Prepare Updated Project Impacts 5 days Mon 8/29/16 Fri 9/2/1673 Caltrans Prepare Updated MMP 20 days Mon 9/5/16 Fri 9/30/1674 Updated MMP Approved 60 days Mon 10/3/16 Fri 12/23/167576 Task 10: Bid Support and DSDC 101 days Thu 11/16/17 Fri 4/6/1877 Authorization to Bid 0 days Thu 11/16/17 Thu 11/16/1778 Ready Project for Bid 20 days Fri 11/17/17 Thu 12/14/1779 Advertise Project 36 days Fri 12/15/17 Fri 2/2/1880 Bid Award 20 days Fri 2/2/18 Thu 3/1/1881 Contract Approval 15 days Fri 3/2/18 Thu 3/22/1882 Pre-Construction Meeting/NTP for Construction 11 days Fri 3/23/18 Fri 4/6/1883 1st Working Day 0 days Fri 4/6/18 Fri 4/6/18

8/1

11/20

3/26

7/8

10/20

1/20

8/1

11/16

4/6

Jul Sep Nov Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov Jan Mar May JQtr 3, 2013 Qtr 1, 2014 Qtr 3, 2014 Qtr 1, 2015 Qtr 3, 2015 Qtr 1, 2016 Qtr 3, 2016 Qtr 1, 2017 Qtr 3, 2017 Qtr 1, 2018

Task

Critical Task

Milestone

Split

Omitted Tasks

Inactive Task

Inactive Milestone

Inactive Summary

Manual Task

Duration-only

Manual Summary Rollup

Manual Summary

Start-only

Finish-only

Progress

EXHIBIT BMSN B2 Phase 2

SCTA13008-A3

Prepared by: URS Corporation

Project: SCTA MSN B2 Phase 2 Proje

AMENDMENT 3-2

28

AMENDMENT 3 - EXHIBIT C-1

MSN - B2 Phase 2 Median Widening ProjectPSE Phase

Estimated Cost

Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Task 5 Task 6 Task 7 Task 8 Task 9 Task 10 TOTAL

Proj Mgmt

Planning and

Preliminary

Investigations

Preliminary

Engineering

(35%)

Final PS&E

(Unchecked

65% )

Final PS&E

(Checked 95%)

Final PS&E

(100%)

Final PS&E

(RTL)

R/W

Engineering

and Support

Permit

Applications

and Obtain

Permits

Bid Support

and Design

Support

During

ConstructionLABOR

URS (Civil) $196,968 $112,271 $123,516 $208,921 $127,231 $107,134 $432,080 $8,656 $17,150 $473,354 $1,807,280

URS (Environmental) $0 $29,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,039 $0 $69,138

URS (Geotech) $2,992 $75,538 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,580 $94,109

URS (Structures) $3,237 $17,813 $51,384 $64,462 $54,620 $31,292 $148,528 $0 $0 $61,609 $432,946

URS (Traffic) $0 $29,330 $3,173 $11,105 $7,932 $3,173 $0 $0 $0 $0 $54,713

URS (Surveying) $0 $15,932 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,932

Labor Escalation $14,955 $20,607 $13,106 $20,938 $13,968 $10,422 $42,733 $637 $4,209 $40,520 $182,095

SUBCONSULTANTS

WRECO $0 $191,039 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $191,039 DBE

Y&C Engineering $0 $0 $5,951 $27,048 $15,147 $12,021 $17,852 $0 $0 $5,951 $83,970 DBE

Cal Safety $0 $3,540 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,540 DBE

V&A $0 $8,960 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,960 DBE

CH2M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,991 $0 $43,991

DIRECT COSTS

Environmental Testing $0 $9,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,500

Geotech Drilling $0 $29,540 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $29,540

Geotech Testing $0 $6,900 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,900

Printing $0 $5,500 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $27,500

Postage, Travel, Misc. $7,100 $3,300 $100 $100 $100 $100 $1,189 $0 $0 $2,986 $14,975

Env Permit Fees $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,000 $0 $15,000

TOTAL $225,252 $558,870 $200,230 $335,575 $221,998 $167,142 $652,382 $9,293 $120,388 $600,000 $3,091,128

DBE 0.0% 36.4% 3.0% 8.1% 6.8% 7.2% 2.7% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 9.3%

% budget 7.3% 18.1% 6.5% 10.9% 7.2% 5.4% 21.1% 0.3% 3.9% 19.4% 100.0%

9/15/2017

SCTA 130008-A3

29

AMENDMENT 3 - EXHIBIT C-2

MSN - B2 Phase 2 Median Widening ProjectLABOR HOURS ESTIMATE

URS LABOR

ID CODE DELIVERABLE Prin

cip

al-In

-Ch

arg

e

Pro

ject

Ma

na

ge

r

Sr.

Pro

ject

En

gin

ee

r

Pro

ject

En

gin

ee

r

Sta

ff E

ng

ine

er

CA

D

Ad

min

Ge

ote

ch

nic

al

Ma

na

ge

r

Ge

ote

ch

nic

al S

r.

En

gin

ee

r

Ge

ote

ch

nic

al

En

gin

ee

r

Str

uctu

res M

an

ag

er

Sr.

Str

uctu

ral

En

gin

ee

r

Str

uctu

ral E

ng

ine

er

Str

uctu

re C

AD

Str

uctu

re Q

A/Q

C

Sr.

Tra

ffic

En

gin

ee

r

Tra

ffic

En

gin

ee

r

En

viro

nm

en

tal

Ma

na

ge

r

Sr.

En

v P

rofe

ssio

na

l

En

v P

rofe

ssio

na

l

Su

rve

y M

an

ag

er

Su

rve

y P

M

Su

rve

y T

ech

nic

ian

Sr.

La

nd

sca

pe

Arc

hite

ct

La

nd

sca

pe

Arc

ite

ct

UR

S L

AB

OR

TO

TA

L

WR

EC

O

Y&

C E

ng

ine

erin

g

Ca

l S

afe

ty

V&

A

CH

2M

To

tal

En

viro

nm

en

tal T

estin

g

Ge

ote

ch

Drilli

ng

Ge

ote

ch

Te

stin

g

Prin

tin

g

Po

sta

ge

, T

rave

l, M

isc.

En

v P

erm

it F

ee

s

CVL CVL CVL CVL CVL CVL CVL GEO GEO GEO STR STR STR STR STR TRF TRF ENV ENV ENV SVY SVY SVY CVL CVL SUB SUB SUB SUB SUB ODC ODC ODC ODC ODC ODC

Labor rate==> 280 184 180 116 107 127 75 195 179 108 219 185 149 97 168 112 79 182 154 87 146 140 93 175 93 107.3 135 100 100 124 1 1 1 1 1 1

Proj Mgmt (Assume Over 20 Month PS&E Duration)

1.01 Project Administration 16 188 58 262 262

1.02 Scheduling 88 88 88

1.03 Agency/Subconsultant Coordination 16 128 8 152 152

1.04 Kick-off Meeting and PDT Meetings 40 116 16 40 212 212 3,000

1.05 Technical Meetings 16 44 4 40 8 8 8 8 136 136 2,000

1.06 Management Review Meeting 4 6 6 8 24 24 2,000

1.07 Invoices/Progress Reports: 64 40 34 138 138 100

1.08 Risk Management Plan 44 44 44

1.09 Project Filing 24 24 24

1.10 Quality Control 44 40 84 84

Task 1 Subtotal 92 722 106 88 0 0 124 8 8 0 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,164 0 0 0 0 0 1,164 0 0 0 0 7,100 0

Planning and Preliminary Investigations

2.01 Data Collection and Review 10 20 40 70 109 179 200

2.02 Cooperative Agreements 20 4 40 16 80 80

2.03 Geometric Refinements 8 40 40 88 88

2.03 Supplemental Design Exceptions 4 40 8 52 52

2.04 Mapping and Field Survey 4 32 40 20 40 80 216 216 2,000

2.05 Utility Coordination 32 40 40 112 112

2.06 Geotechnical Investigation and Testing 11 16 77 104 35 139 29,540 6,000 600

2.07 Geotechnical Design and Materials Report 4 16 60 61 141 141 750

2.08 Foundation Report 8 33 102 134 277 277 750

2.08 Corrosion Study Report 2 8 10 90 100 900 250

2.09 Hazardous Materials Evaluation 4 8 8 16 80 160 276 276 9,500 250 500

2.10 Drainage Report 10 8 20 2 40 631 671 750

2.11 Storm Water Data Report 10 8 20 2 40 416 456 750

2.12 Storm Water Information Handout 10 8 20 2 40 209 249 250

2.13 Hydromodification Study Report 10 8 20 2 40 416 456 750

2.14 Traffic Management Plan Report 6 16 4 32 80 138 138 500

2.15 Lane Closure Report 6 16 4 68 140 234 234 500

2.16 Box Culvert Review 2 64 40 106 106

2.17 QC Review 4 88 8 8 108 108

Task 2 Subtotal 0 140 164 332 120 24 36 62 186 280 0 64 40 0 0 100 228 16 80 160 20 40 80 0 0 2,172 1,781 0 35 90 0 4,078 9,500 29,540 6,900 5,500 3,300 0

Preliminary Engineering (35%)

3.01 Highway Plan Sheets 24 160 160 240 160 20 4 16 40 824 44 868 3,000 100

3.01 Retaining Wall Plan Sheets 4 80 80 164 164

3.02 Highway Quantities and Cost Estimate 8 20 20 48 48

3.02 Retaining Wall Quantities and Cost Estimate 40 20 60 60

3.03 Construction Schedule 8 24 32 32

3.04 Structure Type Selection (Retaining Walls) 10 40 40 20 110 110

3 3.06 QC Review 4 40 40 84 84

Task 3 Subtotal 0 44 224 220 260 160 20 0 0 0 14 124 56 140 20 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,322 0 44 0 0 0 1,366 0 0 0 3,000 100 0

Final PS&E (Unchecked 65% )

4.01 Highway Plan Sheets 24 220 240 380 360 40 16 40 120 1,440 200 1,640 3,000 100

4.01 Retaining Wall Plan Sheets 10 80 160 250 250

4.03 Highway Special Provisions 8 80 40 128 128

4.03 Retaining Wall Special Provisions 40 40 40

4.04 Highway Quantities and Cost Estimate 8 40 40 20 108 108

4.04 Retaining Wall Quantities and Cost Estimate 60 60 120 120

4.05 Construction Schedule 8 16 24 24

4.06 QC Review 4 40 40 84 84

4.07 Constructability Review 4 16 16 4 40 40

Task 4 Subtotal 0 56 292 416 460 360 40 0 0 0 10 140 100 220 0 0 140 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,234 0 200 0 0 0 2,434 0 0 0 3,000 100 0

Final PS&E (Checked 95%)

5.01 Highway Plan Sheets 24 160 160 160 120 40 24 40 80 808 112 920 3,000 100

5.01 Retaining Wall Plan Sheets 10 40 40 90 90

5.02 Highway Special Provisions 8 80 40 128 128

5.02 Retaining Wall Special Provisions 40 40 40

5.03 Highway Quantities and Cost Estimate 8 40 40 20 108 108

5.03 Retaining Wall Quantities and Cost Estimate 40 40 80 80

5.04 Construction Schedule 4 8 12 12

5.05 Independent Structural Check (Retaining Walls) 80 80 80

5.06 QC Review 4 40 40 84 84

Task 5 Subtotal 0 48 208 320 240 120 40 0 0 0 10 104 80 80 80 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,430 0 112 0 0 0 1,542 0 0 0 3,000 100 0

U:\28645460 MSN Sonoma Phase 2\01-PM\Contract\04 - Amendment 03\2017-09-15_Rev1 to SCTA\MSN Phase 2 - 52 Month Design Estimate 2017-09-15.xlsx 9/15/2017

SCTA 13008-A3

30

EXHIBIT C-2

MSN - B2 Phase 2 Median Widening ProjectLABOR HOURS ESTIMATE

URS LABOR

ID CODE DELIVERABLE Prin

cip

al-In

-Ch

arg

e

Pro

ject

Ma

na

ge

r

Sr.

Pro

ject

En

gin

ee

r

Pro

ject

En

gin

ee

r

Sta

ff E

ng

ine

er

CA

D

Ad

min

Ge

ote

ch

nic

al

Ma

na

ge

r

Ge

ote

ch

nic

al S

r.

En

gin

ee

r

Ge

ote

ch

nic

al

En

gin

ee

r

Str

uctu

res M

an

ag

er

Sr.

Str

uctu

ral

En

gin

ee

r

Str

uctu

ral E

ng

ine

er

Str

uctu

re C

AD

Str

uctu

re Q

A/Q

C

Sr.

Tra

ffic

En

gin

ee

r

Tra

ffic

En

gin

ee

r

En

viro

nm

en

tal

Ma

na

ge

r

Sr.

En

v P

rofe

ssio

na

l

En

v P

rofe

ssio

na

l

Su

rve

y M

an

ag

er

Su

rve

y P

M

Su

rve

y T

ech

nic

ian

Sr.

La

nd

sca

pe

Arc

hite

ct

La

nd

sca

pe

Arc

ite

ct

UR

S L

AB

OR

TO

TA

L

WR

EC

O

Y&

C E

ng

ine

erin

g

Ca

l S

afe

ty

V&

A

CH

2M

To

tal

En

viro

nm

en

tal T

estin

g

Ge

ote

ch

Drilli

ng

Ge

ote

ch

Te

stin

g

Prin

tin

g

Po

sta

ge

, T

rave

l, M

isc.

En

v P

erm

it F

ee

s

Final PS&E (100%)

6.01 Consolidated Plans 8 40 120 120 160 20 10 100 20 40 20 658 89 747 3,000 100

6.02 Consolidated Special Provisions 4 120 20 144 144

6.03 Consolidated Quantities and Cost Estimate 4 40 40 20 104 104

6.03 Cost Certification Memorandum/Form 4 16 20 20

6.03 Supplemental Work Items Justification Memorandum 4 8 12 12

6.04 Construction Schedule 4 8 12 12

6.05 Informational Handout 4 40 44 44

6.05 PS&E Submittal Memorandum 4 8 12 12

6.06 QC Review 4 40 40 84 84

Task 6 Subtotal 0 40 88 352 200 160 20 0 0 0 10 120 20 40 0 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,090 0 89 0 0 0 1,179 0 0 0 3,000 100 0

Final PS&E (RTL)

7.01 Bid Documents 18 396 340 400 204 70 80 260 80 40 132 2,020 84 2,104 7,000 100

7.01.01 Added Combined PS&E Submittal 4/10/2017 8 120 120 120 120 8 80 80 80 16 40 792 40 832 3,000 100

7.01.02 Added Structure PS&E Submittal 5/24/2017 8 60 80 40 188 188 200

7.01.03 Added PS&E Revisions for 401 Certification 40 40 40 24 144 144

7.01.04 Respond to FHWA Structure Comments 8 8 24 40 40

7.01.05 Post RTL Revisions 40 80 24 16 160 8 168 150

7.01.06 Conceptual SWPPP 12 120 40 24 196 196 150

7.01.07 Coordination with Other MSN Projects 40 40 120 40 240 240 489

7.02 Resident Engineer's File 4 40 80 124 124

7.03 Survey File 4 40 40 80 164 164

7.04 Caltrans CAD Submittals 4 40 80 124 124

7.05 QC Review 8 40 20 8 76 76

Task 7 Subtotal 0 86 728 960 824 468 0 0 0 0 94 228 444 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56 180 4,268 0 132 0 0 0 4,400 0 0 0 10,000 1,189 0

R/W Engineering and Support

8.01 Encroachment Permits 4 20 20 44 44

8.02 R/W Certification 4 8 12 12

Task 8 Subtotal 0 8 28 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56 0 0 0 0 0 56 0 0 0 0 0 0

Permit Applications and Obtain Permits

9.01 Environmental Permits 4 40 60 24 80 320 528 528 15,000

9.01 Construction General Permit Compliance 20 20 20

9.01 Revised JD Mapping 0 356 356

Task 9 Subtotal 0 4 0 60 60 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 320 0 0 0 0 0 548 0 0 0 0 356 904 0 0 0 0 0 15,000

Bid Support and Design Support During Construction

10.01 Bid Support 24 40 80 80 80 40 8 8 8 4 16 40 40 4 8 480 4 484 486

10.02 Design Support During Construction (Assume 18 Month Duration) 160 540 800 800 800 240 16 24 40 16 80 120 120 16 24 3,796 40 3,836 2,500

Task 10 Subtotal 0 184 580 880 880 880 280 24 32 48 20 96 160 160 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 32 4,276 0 44 0 0 0 4,320 0 0 0 0 2,986 0

Total Project Hours 92 1,332 2,418 3,628 3,064 2,196 560 94 226 328 166 884 900 840 100 100 548 16 160 480 20 40 80 76 212 18,560 1,781 621 35 90 356 21,443 9,500 29,540 6,900 27,500 14,975 15,000

TOTAL HOURS BY PERCENT 0.5% 7.2% 13.0% 19.5% 16.5% 11.8% 3.0% 0.5% 1.2% 1.8% 0.9% 4.8% 4.8% 4.5% 0.5% 0.5% 3.0% 0.1% 0.9% 2.6% 0.1% 0.2% 0.4% 0.4% 1.1% 100.0% 8.3% 2.9% 0.2% 0.4% 1.7% 100.0% 44.3% 137.8% 32.2% 128.2% 69.8% 70.0%

For purposes of the estimate, rates are estimated average for each position

Billing rates are determined by actual salary at time of service times audited multiplier

Annual escalation occurs each January 1

Billing rate increases do not increase contract limit

U:\28645460 MSN Sonoma Phase 2\01-PM\Contract\04 - Amendment 03\2017-09-15_Rev1 to SCTA\MSN Phase 2 - 52 Month Design Estimate 2017-09-15.xlsx 9/15/201731

AMENDMENT 3 - EXHIBIT C-3

MSN - B2 Phase 2 Median Widening Project

Estimated Cost

DIRECT LABOR Hours Rate Total

Principal-In-Charge 92 115.00 $10,580

Project Manager 1332 75.40 $100,433

Sr. Project Engineer 2418 73.92 $178,739

Project Engineer 3628 47.50 $172,330

Staff Engineer 3064 44.00 $134,816

CAD 2196 52.00 $114,192

Admin 560 30.79 $17,242

Geotechnical Manager 94 80.12 $7,531

Geotechnical Sr. Engineer 226 73.40 $16,588

Geotechnical Engineer 328 44.24 $14,511

Structures Manager 166 90.08 $14,953

Sr. Structural Engineer 884 76.00 $67,184

Structural Engineer 900 61.20 $55,080

Structure CAD 840 40.00 $33,600

Structure QA/QC 100 69.00 $6,900

Sr. Traffic Engineer 100 46.16 $4,616

Traffic Engineer 548 32.56 $17,843

Environmental Manager 16 74.56 $1,193

Sr. Env Professional 160 63.36 $10,138

Env Professional 480 35.52 $17,050

Survey Manager 20 60.00 $1,200

Survey PM 40 57.50 $2,300

Survey Technician 80 38.00 $3,040

Sr. Landscape Architect 76 72.00 $5,472

Landscape Arcitect 212 38.00 $8,056

Total Direct Labor 18,560 $1,015,586

Overhead 121.468% $1,233,613

Fee 10% $224,920

Labor Escalation (52 month sched) 7.360% $182,095

Total Labor $2,656,214

SUBCONSULTANTS

H&A $0

WRECO $191,039

Y&C Engineering $83,970

Cal Safety $3,540

V&A $8,960

CH2M $43,991

Subtotal Subconsultants $331,499

Subconsultant Fee 0% $0

Total Subconsultants $331,499

EXPENSES

Environmental Drilling $0

Environmental Testing $9,500

Geotech Drilling $29,540

Geotech Testing $6,900

Potholing $0

Printing $27,500

Postage, Travel, Misc. $14,975

Env Permit Fees $15,000

Subtotal Expenses $103,415

Expenses Fee 0% $0

Total Expenses $103,415

TOTAL PROJECT COST $3,091,128

For purposes of the estimate, rates are estimated average for each position

Billing rates are determined by actual salary at time of service times audited multiplier

Annual escalation occurs each January 1

Billing rate increases do not increase contract limit

9/15/2017

SCTA13008-A3

32

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: Sonoma County Transportation Authority

From: Seana L. S. Gause, Senior – Programming and Projects

Item: Status of Measure M annual reporting letters

Date: October 9, 2017

Issue:

What is the status of the annual reporting for expenditures of Measure M funds for FY16/17?

Background:

The Traffic Relief Act of Sonoma County requires that agencies receiving Measure M funds report on how those funds were spent in a given fiscal year. Reporting letters are due on September 15 of each year, reporting on the previous fiscal year. This requirement is outlined in the 2017 Strategic Plan, Policy 4.12. Reporting letters are required for the following programs:

• Transit/Rail (LBT/Rail) • Local Streets Rehabilitation (LSR) • Local Streets Projects (LSP) • Bicycle/Pedestrian Projects (Bike/Ped)

If an agency fails to submit Measure M reporting letters by the deadline, the Strategic Plan states that the next fiscal year’s allocation or reimbursements for expenditures (in the case of Local Streets or Bike/Ped Projects) may be withheld until the reporting letter is received. Upon the suggestion of the auditor, governing bodies of any Measure M recipients delinquent in submitting annual reporting letters may be notified in writing.

The LSR program allows cities to carry over funds for up to three years in order to amass funds for larger projects. The program also requires that if an agency has chosen to carry over funds from previous fiscal year’s allocation, interest on the sum must be reported. Banked funds must be spent in the third year, or SCTA reserves the right to withhold the next year’s allocation until the jurisdiction’s balance is drawn down, as is outlined in the Strategic Plan, Policy 4.1. Several jurisdictions show a partial expenditure of funds, but are banking some portion of the balance for future expenditures.

All LSR reporting letters were received by the 9/15/17 deadline.

LBT program funds are distributed on a quarterly basis. All transit agencies receiving Measure M funding are required to submit an annual audit to accompany their reporting. Because the annual audits usually take some months to produce after the close of the fiscal year, they are not always complete by the reporting deadline of September 15, thus transit agencies are given until December 31 to submit the required audit. Reporting letters remain due on September 15. All transit agencies submitted their annual reporting letters.

33

All reporting letters for the LSP, Bike/Ped and Rail programs were submitted on time. This summary was also provided to the SCTA Technical and Citizens Advisory Committees.

Policy Impacts:

None, these procedures are consistent with the policy established in the Traffic Relief Act of Sonoma County, and the 2017 Strategic Plan.

Fiscal Impacts:

None

Staff Recommendation:

None, this is an information item only.

34

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: SCTA Board of Directors

From: Suzanne Smith, Executive Director

Item: 3.5 - Resolution No. 2017-025 authorizing the purchase of prior public service for employee members of the Sonoma County Employees’ Retirement Association

Date: October 9, 2017

Issue:

Shall the Board adopt Resolution No. 2017-025 authorizing employees to purchase prior public service as part of their membership in the Sonoma County Employees’ Retirement Association (SCERA)?

Background:

Employees of the SCTA are members of SCERA for retirement benefits. SCERA notified the SCTA that per Government Code 31641.95 a resolution is required in order to enable employees to purchase prior public service. The purchase of prior service allows an employee to purchase service credit for time worked for the federal government or another California public agency not participating in SCERA if the employee won’t receive a retirement benefit from that agency and does not establish reciprocity. Sonoma County has taken the position that all employee members are allowed to make these purchases based on prior actions by the Board of Supervisors.

Policy Impacts:

This action brings into compliance past practice and aligns with the benefits provided to other members of SCERA.

Fiscal Impacts:

None.

Staff Recommendation:

Consider adoption Resolution No. 2017-025 authorizing employees to purchase prior public service as part of their membership in the Sonoma County Employee Retirement Association.

35

SCTA Resolution Number 2017-025 Sonoma County Transportation Authority

Santa Rosa, California October 9, 2017

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SONOMA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, COUNTY OF SONOMA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF PRIOR PUBLIC SERVICE FOR EMPLOYEE MEMBERS OF THE SONOMA COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION.

WHEREAS, employees of the Sonoma County Transportation Authority (SCTA) are members of the Sonoma County Employees’ Retirement Association (SCERA) in accordance with the terms of the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 (CERL); and

WHEREAS, the Board of the SCTA has determined that employee members of SCERA should be permitted to purchase additional retirement credit for public service rendered prior to employment with the SCTA to the extent such additional credit is authorized under CERL and in particular Government Code 31641.1 and 31641.2; and

WHEREAS, the provisions of Government Code 31641.1 and 31641.2 may only become applicable for SCTA employee members as of the first day of the month after the SCTA Board, by majority vote, adopts a resolution making those sections applicable.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to Government Code 31641.95 the Board of the SCTA hereby makes Government Code 31641.1 and 31641.2 applicable for SCTA employee members of SCERA, providing for the purchase of prior public service retirement credit, applicable on the first day of the month following adoption of this Resolution.

THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was moved by Director ___, seconded by Director ___, and approved by the following vote:

Director Agrimonti Director Mansell Director Coursey Director Miller Director Gorin Director Rabbitt Director Gurney Director Russell Director Landman Director Salmon Director Mackenzie Director Zane

Ayes: ____ Noes: __ Absent: __ Abstain: __ SO ORDERED I, the undersigned, certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Sonoma County Transportation Authority held on October 9, 2017. ______________________________________ Suzanne Smith, Executive Director Clerk, Sonoma County Transportation Authority

36

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: RCPA Board of Directors

From: Lauren Casey, Director of Climate Programs

Item: 3.6 – BayREN Contract Amendments (ACTION)* Date: October 9, 2017

Issue:

Shall the Board authorize staff to execute the first amendment to the funding and implementation agreement (RCPA17004-A1) between the RCPA and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) for the implementation of the Bay Area Regional Energy Network (BayREN) Pay As You Save (PAYS) program? Shall the Board authorize staff to execute the first amendment (RCPA17005-A1) to the agreement between the RCPA and Frontier Energy, Inc. (formerly Bevilaqua-Knight, Inc.) for continued services related to PAYS implementation?

Background:

The RCPA represents the communities of Sonoma County in the implementation of BayREN programs, which are administered by ABAG.

This Amendment for the agreement with ABAG addresses several items:

• Corrects an error from the original contract budget which had Codes and Standards implementation funding incorrectly allocated as marketing and outreach;

• Adds $5,000 to the RCPA budget for Codes and Standards outreach to support local Zero Net Energy coordination; and

• Adds $15,000 to the RCPA budget for the Pay As You Save (PAYS program) to support increased services provided by Frontier Energy related to regional program scoping.

Policy Impacts:

Participation in BayREN programs supports the RCPA goal to increase energy efficiency.

Fiscal Impacts:

This adds $20,000 to the RCPA budget, $15,000 of which will be used to retain additional services from Frontier Energy.

Staff Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the Board authorize staff to execute agreement RCPA17004-A1 to implement BayREN PAYS and Codes and Standards programs. Staff recommends that the Board authorize staff to execute agreement RCPA17005-A1 for assistance with PAYS implementation from Frontier Energy.

37

RCPA17004-A1

Amended Funding & Implementation Agreement First Amendment – RCPA, on behalf of Sonoma County Page 1 of 10

FIRST AMENDMENT TO FUNDING AND IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT - BAYREN PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN for 2017 –

ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS AND REGIONAL CLIMATE PROTECTION AUTHORITY, ON BEHALF OF SONOMA COUNTY

The funding and Implementation Agreement for the BayREN Implementation Plan for 2017 (Agreement) between the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and Regional Climate Protection Authority, on behalf of Sonoma County (Subrecipient) is hereby amended as follows:

A. The Allocated Budget in Section 5(a) of the Agreement is set at Four Hundred Twenty-Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Eighteen Dollars ($428,718), as detailed on Page 2 of this First Amendment.

B. Attachment 1C for 2017 is deleted and replaced by Attachment 1C for 2017, Revision 1, which adopts Zero Net Energy Coordination accountabilities and budget.

C. Attachment 1E for 2017 is deleted and replaced by Attachment 1E for 2017, Revision 1, which allocates additional accountabilities and budget for technical assistance and development of a regional program model.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Subrecipient has duly executed this Agreement, or caused it to be duly executed, and ABAG has duly executed this Agreement, or caused it to be duly executed. RCPA Dated: _______________________ __________________________________

Suzanne Smith Executive Director

Association of Bay Area Governments

Dated: ________________________ ___________________________________

Steve Heminger, MTC Executive Director, acting pursuant to the Contract for Services dated May 30, 2017

Approved as to form: ____________________________ Adrienne D Weil, General Counsel

38

RCPA17004-A1

Amended Funding & Implementation Agreement First Amendment – RCPA, on behalf of Sonoma County Page 2 of 10

Energy Council – Calendar Year 2017

Existing Budget Contract Amendment #1 Updated Not-to-Exceed Budget

Single Family $53,772.00 - $53,772.00 Admin $15,000.00 - $15,000.00 Implementation $0.00 - $0.00 Marketing $38,772.00 - $38,772.00 Incentives $0.00 - $0.00 Multifamily $20,600.00 - $20,600.00 Admin $15,600.00 - $15,600.00 Implementation $0.00 - $0.00 Marketing $5,000.00 - $5,000.00 Incentives $0.00 - $0.00 PACE $700.00 - $700.00 Admin $700.00 - $700.00 Implementation $0.00 - $0.00 Marketing $0.00 - $0.00 PAYS $303,946.00 $15,000.00 $318,946.00 Admin $1,610.00 - $1,610.00 Implementation $232,885.00 $15,000.00 $247,885.00 Marketing $69,451..00 - $69,451.00 Codes & Standards $29,700.00 $5,000.00 $34,700.00 Admin $2,700.00 - $2,700.00 Implementation $0.00 $32,000.00 $32,000.00 Marketing $27,000.00 ($27,000.00)* $0.00 Multifamily CAP $0.00 - $0.00 Admin $0.00 - $0.00 Implementation $0.00 - $0.00 Marketing $0.00 - $0.00 Portfolio Total $408,718.00 $20,000.00 $428,718.00

*Page 36 of the fully executed Attachment 1C of the Amended Funding and Implementation Agreement for 2017 between ABAG and RCPA incorrectly assigned Twenty-Seven Thousand Dollars ($27,000) to Marketing & Outreach. The entire $27,000 is hereby reassigned to Implementation, as reflected in Attachment 1C, Revision 1.

39

RCPA17004-A1

Amended Funding & Implementation Agreement First Amendment – RCPA, on behalf of Sonoma County Page 3 of 10

ATTACHMENT 1C for 2017, Revision 1

Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority, on behalf of County of Sonoma

Scope of Work

BayREN Codes & Standards Program

Budget NTE: $34,700

The BayREN Counties will provide services in their jurisdictions to support the BayREN Codes & Standards Program. These tasks include: coordination with the BayREN Codes and Standards Committee and Coordinating Circle; promotion of trainings, over the counter and electronic compliance improvement tools, regional forums, and reach code and zero net energy (ZNE) policy resources; and engagement with the Bay Area chapters of the International Code Council (ICC), City and County Board of Supervisors, local governments within their respective County and other key stakeholders (local contractor and building professional groups/associations, property owner and building operator associations, etc.). The total budget for Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority (“RCPA”), on behalf of the County of Sonoma for 2017 is $34,700. Tasks below are assigned based on local budget and capacity to deliver services.

I. Admin – Cross Link

Purpose: Represent RCPA context within BayREN Role Accountabilities:

• Removing constraints within BayREN that limit its ability to collaborate and deliver effective programs

• Sharing progress, performance, and strategic data and information with the Coordinating Circle

• Establishing that member has been selected by its county to act on its behalf • Ensuring that member has expertise and experience in energy-related project

management and implementation • Ensuring invoices and reporting are submitted to Program Administrator in a timely

manner • Developing and reviewing program performance, and program and pilot

recommendations • Reviewing and authorizing program changes

40

RCPA17004-A1

Amended Funding & Implementation Agreement First Amendment – RCPA, on behalf of Sonoma County Page 4 of 10

II. Implementation a. Local Stakeholder Engagement

Purpose: Support the Codes & Standards program at the County level Role Accountabilities:

• Communicating with RCPA’s stakeholders about BayREN programs and activities • Seeking to understand tensions conveyed by any of RCPA’s stakeholders applicable to

the BayREN programs, and discerning those appropriate to channel into Coordinating Circle for processing

• Sharing the perspective of RCPA stakeholders • Coordinating with local Energy Watch/Local Government Partnership and other RCPA

programs • Coordinating with other Regional Energy Networks, e.g., program implementation

tactics, program design, program performance, mutual objective-building, etc. • Providing email, phone and other marketing for regional forum events • Recruiting local governments for hosting trainings from the BayREN curriculum or

specialty trainings developed in the program • Researching, supporting, and advocating for specific energy policy at the local

government level • Providing local coordination and assistance in follow up for jurisdictions that may benefit

from or be interested in BayREN compliance improvement tools • Coordinating with cities within the County, Energy Watch/Local Government

Partnership, and other local programs • Providing Program Lead with local information, contacts and data that support and

promote the Program • Reporting on best practices and highest performing activities to the Codes and Standards

Committee • Analyzing local program performance to identify gaps and recommendations to Program

Lead

b. Zero Net Energy (ZNE) Coordination Purpose: Increased coordination with local governments, BayREN, and any consultants working on the BayREN Codes and Standards Zero Net Energy. Role Accountabilities:

• Coordinate on ZNE programs o Meet with BayREN consultants and local government staff as needed to share and

collaborate on strategy • Continue to support the zero net energy work in Sonoma County • Provide increased local coordination and assistance in follow up for local governments

o Coordinate on program strategy and communication. RCPA will help to identify and coordinate activities

• Increased communication with BayREN, consultants, and local governments • Provide increased reporting on activities to the Codes and Standards Committee • Increased support for zero net energy at the local government level

41

RCPA17004-A1

Amended Funding & Implementation Agreement First Amendment – RCPA, on behalf of Sonoma County Page 5 of 10

Budget

Task Budget Administration $2,700.00 Implementation $32,000.00 Marketing & Outreach $0.00

Total $34,700.00

42

RCPA17004-A1

Amended Funding & Implementation Agreement First Amendment – RCPA, on behalf of Sonoma County Page 6 of 10

ATTACHMENT 1E for 2017, Revision 1

Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority (on behalf of County of Sonoma)

Scope of Work

BayREN PAYS® Program

Budget NTE: $318,946

The Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority (“RCPA”) will act as the Lead Link to the Pay as you Save Program Circle. RCPA will oversee PAYS Coordination and Technical Assistance roles, and provide for PAYS Accounting. RCPA will provide local partner utility support for implementation and marketing in its capacity for PAYS Local Outreach. RCPA will provide administrative tasks in its capacity as a Cross Link and for participation in the Coordinating Circle. The total budget is $318,946.

I. Admin

A. Cross Link

Purpose: Representing County of Sonoma context within BayREN Role Accountabilities:

• Removing constraints within BayREN that limit its ability to collaborate and deliver effective programs

• Seeking to understand Tensions conveyed by any of County of Sonoma stakeholders applicable to the BayREN programs, and discerning those appropriate to channel into Coordinating Circle for processing

• Sharing the perspective of County of Sonoma stakeholders • Communicating with County of Sonoma stakeholders about BayREN programs and

activities • Sharing progress, performance, and strategic data and information with the Coordinating

Circle • Coordinating with local Energy Watch/Local Government Partnership and other County

of Sonoma programs. • Establishing that member has been selected by its county to act on its behalf • Ensuring that member has expertise and experience in energy-related project

management and implementation • Ensuring invoices and reporting are submitted to Program Administrator in a timely

manner • Developing and reviewing program performance, and program and pilot

recommendations • Reviewing and authorizing program changes

43

RCPA17004-A1

Amended Funding & Implementation Agreement First Amendment – RCPA, on behalf of Sonoma County Page 7 of 10

• Coordinating with other Regional Energy Networks, e.g., program implementation tactics, program design, program performance, mutual objective- building, etc.

B. Lead Link

Purpose: Optimize PAYS program performance Role Accountabilities:

• Allocating PAYS resources incorporating the input from circle members • Assigning PAYS roles, monitoring fit for role, providing feedback to enhance fit and

removing Partners from roles incorporating the input from circle members • Assessing and defining priorities and strategies for the PAYS • Defining and assigning metrics for the program incorporating the input from circle

members • Informing BayREN member(s) of relevant activities within county • Providing oversight for PAYS Coordination & day-to-day implementation • Managing consultants • Providing for PAYS Accounting & proper handling of ratepayer funds • Monitoring and forecasting budget, expenditures, and receivables • Adhering to regulatory requirements and guidelines • Processing sub-consultant and partner utility invoices • Submitting monthly invoices and reporting

C. PAYS Coordination

Purpose: Day-to-day program implementation Role Accountabilities:

• Coordinating with Lead Link, Rep Link, and Cross Links, BayREN Administrator, PAYS technical team, partner utilities, PG&E, CPUC, and EM&V consultants

• Reporting on program progress and supporting Program Administrator in responding to data requests

II. Implementation

A. PAYS Lead Link

Purpose: Optimize PAYS program performance Role Accountabilities:

• Overseeing PAYS planning and meetings; monthly meetings anticipated: o One PAYS Program Circle meeting with Rep Link, Local Outreach,

Coordination, Technical Assistance, and BayREN Administrator o Two Administrative meetings per month with Rep Link and BayREN

Administrator o Four Management meetings with Lead Link and PAYS Coordinator

44

RCPA17004-A1

Amended Funding & Implementation Agreement First Amendment – RCPA, on behalf of Sonoma County Page 8 of 10

o Two PAYS design meetings with Coordinator and Technical Assistance team o One Coordinating Circle

• Providing oversight for PAYS Coordination & day-to-day implementation • Soliciting professional counsel to support PAYS program in resolution of legal,

contractual, and policy issues

B. PAYS Coordination

Purpose: Day-to-day program implementation Role Accountabilities:

• Facilitating PAYS planning and meetings; monthly meetings anticipated: o One PAYS Program Circle meeting with Rep Link, Local Outreach,

Coordination, Technical Assistance, and BayREN Administrator o Two Administrative meetings per month with Rep Link and BayREN

Administrator o Four Management meetings with Lead Link and PAYS Coordinator o Two PAYS design meetings with Coordinator and Technical Assistance team o Two partner utility meetings with each partner o One Coordinating Circle

• Managing technical sub consultant team • Adapting and adjusting program as needed • Monitoring regulatory activities that impact program and representing Program in

relevant stakeholder groups, committees and advisory groups

C. PAYS Technical Assistance

Purpose: Provide excellent service and value to partner utilities through the development and delivery of PAYS programs Role Accountabilities:

• Advising and assisting participating utilities in developing PAYS program concepts • Continued leadership in the development of a PAYS regional program model • Continued coordination with ABAG’s potential Advancing California Finance Authority

(ACFA) JPA • Ensuring that program design meets projected energy savings targets • Determining target customer and building sector(s), and targeted measures • Developing and refining program software tools • Developing and refining operational procedures for start-up, measure delivery, QA/QC,

financial operations, etc. • Updating previously developed contracts and forms • Assisting partner utilities through procurement of capital, contractors, vendors, and other

PAYS services as needed

45

RCPA17004-A1

Amended Funding & Implementation Agreement First Amendment – RCPA, on behalf of Sonoma County Page 9 of 10

• Develop and implement training curriculum for utilities, contractors, vendors, etc. • Support EM&V efforts for BayREN reporting

D. PAYS Local Outreach

Purpose: Support the PAYS program at the county level. Role Accountabilities:

• Participating in PAYS planning and meetings as requested by Lead; monthly meetings anticipated: one per partner utility plus one PAYS Program Circle

• Serving as a local contact for PAYS utilities in the County for questions about BayREN • Providing Program Lead with local information, contacts and data that support and

promote the Program • Analyzing local program performance to identify gaps and recommendations to Program

Lead

III. Marketing & Outreach

A. PAYS Coordination

Purpose: Day-to-day program implementation Role Accountabilities:

• Coordinating with Lead Link, Rep Link, and Cross Links, BayREN Administrator, PAYS technical team, partner utilities, PG&E, CPUC, and EM&V consultants

B. PAYS Technical Assistance

Purpose: Provide excellent service and value to partner utilities through the development and delivery of PAYS programs Role Accountabilities:

• Support partner utility customer marketing campaign • Conducting onsite surveys of potential projects and quality assurance on completed

projects

C. PAYS Local Outreach

Purpose: Support the PAYS program at the county level. Role Accountabilities:

• Recruiting PAYS partner utilities • Ensuring outreach is done in all jurisdictions within the member county (towns, cities,

unincorporated areas, etc.) • Supporting PAYS partner utilities in outreach to elected officials, staff, customers, the

general public, and other stakeholders

46

RCPA17004-A1

Amended Funding & Implementation Agreement First Amendment – RCPA, on behalf of Sonoma County Page 10 of 10

Budget

Task Budget Administration $1,610.00 Implementation $247,885.00 Marketing & Outreach $69,451.00

Total $318,946.00

47

RCPA Contract Number: RCPA17005-A1

FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES – RCPA17005-A1

- BAYREN PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2017 - REGIONAL CLIMATE PROTECTION AUTHORITY (RCPA) AND FRONTIER ENERGY

The agreement for consultant services (Agreement) for the purposes of designing and implementing services to be implemented under the Bay Area Regional Energy Network (BayREN) Pay As You Save (PAYS®) program between the Regional Climate Protection Authority (RCPA) and Frontier Energy (Consultant) is hereby amended as follows:

A. The Budget of the Agreement in Attachment I for PAYS services to be delivered in 2017 is increased by $15,000 and the Total Budget of the Agreement is $252,236 per the budget breakdown in the revised attachment below.

IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, Consultant has duly executed this Agreement, or caused it to be duly executed, and RCPA has duly executed this Agreement, or caused it to be duly executed. Dated: _______________________ __________________________________ Suzanne Smith, Executive Director – RCPA Dated: ________________________ ___________________________________

Larry Brand, President - Frontier Energy

Approved as to form: ____________________________ Cory O’Donnell, Legal Counsel

48

RCPA Contract Number: RCPA17005-A1

ATTACHMENT I

Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority

BayREN Financing Subprogram: PAYS®

Implementation for 2017

Frontier Energy Scope of Work

Budget NTE: $252,236

Frontier Energy will provide services in delivering PAYS Coordination and Technical Assistance roles. RCPA will provide oversight to Frontier Energy in its capacity as PAYS Lead Link. The total budget assigned to Frontier Energy is $252,236.

I. Implementation

A. PAYS Coordination

Purpose: Day-to-day program implementation Role Accountabilities:

• Facilitating PAYS planning and meetings; monthly meetings anticipated: o One PAYS Committee meeting with Rep Link, Local Outreach, Coordination,

Technical Assistance, and BayREN Administrator o Two Administrative meetings per month with Rep Link and BayREN

Administrator o Four Management meetings with Lead Link and PAYS Coordinator o Two PAYS design meetings with Coordinator and Technical Assistance team o Two partner utility meetings with each partner

• Managing technical sub consultant team • Adapting and adjusting program as needed • Reporting on program progress and supporting Program Administrator in responding to

data requests • Monitoring regulatory activities that impact program and representing Program in

relevant stakeholder groups, committees and advisory groups

B. PAYS Technical Assistance

Purpose: Provide excellent service and value to partner utilities through the development and delivery of PAYS programs Role Accountabilities:

• Advising and assisting participating utilities in developing PAYS program concepts

49

RCPA Contract Number: RCPA17005-A1

• Ensuring that program design meets projected energy and/or water savings targets consistent with guidance from BayREN and CPUC

• Determining target customer and building sector(s), and targeted measures • Developing and refining program software tools • Developing and refining operational procedures for start-up, contractor services and

measure delivery, QA/QC, financial operations, etc. • Updating previously developed contracts and forms • Assisting partner utilities through procurement of capital, contractors, vendors, and other

PAYS services as needed • Developing and implementing training curriculum for utilities, contractors, vendors, etc. • Supporting development of regional program models and support mechanisms • Supporting EM&V efforts for BayREN reporting and project assessment

II. Marketing & Outreach

A. PAYS Coordination

Purpose: Day-to-day program implementation Role Accountabilities:

• Coordinating with Lead Link, Rep Link, and Cross Links, BayREN Administrator, PAYS technical team, partner utilities, PG&E, CPUC, and EM&V consultants

B. PAYS Technical Assistance

Purpose: Provide excellent service and value to partner utilities through the development and delivery of PAYS programs Role Accountabilities:

• Support partner utility customer marketing campaign with activities that may include: o Marketing collateral templates for program utilities and qualified contractors o Web content

• Conducting onsite surveys of potential projects and quality assurance on completed projects

2017 Budget

Task Original 2017 Budget Amendment 1 2017 Total Labor Expenses Labor Expenses

Administration $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Implementation $172,585.00 $0.00 $10,500 $0.00 $183,085.00 Marketing and Outreach

$63,651.00 $1,000.00 $4,500 $0.00 $69,151.00

2017 Total $236,236.00 $1,000.00 $15,000 $0.00 $252,236.00

50

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: RCPA Board of Directors

From: Lauren Casey, Director of Climate Programs

Item: 4.1.1 - CA2020 – action to decertify the Environmental Impact Report for the Climate Action 2020 and Beyond plan

Date: October 9, 2017

Issue:

Shall the Board adopt Resolution No. 2017-002 to decertify the Environmental Impact Report associated with the Climate Action 2020 and Beyond Plan?

Background:

The RCPA developed the Climate Action 2020 and Beyond Plan (CA2020) over the course of several years as a tool to identify local measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). The Plan was assessed for potential adverse environmental impacts of implementing these measures via a programmatic Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The CA2020 Plan was adopted by the RCPA Board in July, and the associated EIR was certified via RCPA Resolution Number 2016-002.

California River Watch filed a complaint against the RCPA’s adoption of the plan on the grounds of the adequacy of the EIR on several fronts: greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory methodology, measure certainty, range of alternatives, and adequacy of reply comments during the EIR process. Unfortunately, the Judgement issued by the trial court agreed with the petitioner on multiple counts, and requires that the RCPA Board rescind the resolution certifying the EIR for CA2020. The RCPA Board faced the option whether to appeal or agree to a stipulation of terms with California River Watch in response to the judgement. The financial risks and delays caused by an appeal were deemed to be too great relative to the benefit of preserving the EIR.

The Board authorized counsel and the Executive Director to enter into a settlement with California River Watch in which RCPA pays $226,912, comprised of $225,000 in attorney fees and $1,912 in costs, in two installment payments over two years. As further requirements of the settlement, RCPA would agree not to appeal, and California River Watch would reaffirm in signed correspondence on letterhead its commitment not to challenge the measures in the plan.

Policy Impacts:

This action will prevent the use of the Programmatic EIR in subsequent CEQA analysis for the purposes of the implementation of the CA2020 measures or for the analysis of GHG emissions. It will render the CA2020 Plan useful as an advisory document only, and will not prevent the implementation of the measures.

Fiscal Impacts:

None.

Staff Recommendation:

That the Board adopt Resolution No 2017-002 to decertify the EIR associated with CA2020.

51

Resolution Number 2017-002 Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority

Santa Rosa, California October 9, 2017

A RESOLUTION OF THE REGIONAL CLIMATE PROTECTION AUTHORITY TO DECERTIFY ITS CERTIFICATION OF THE CLIMATE ACTION 2020 AND BEYOND PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT.

WHEREAS, the RCPA developed a community wide plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) called Climate Action 2020 and Beyond; and WHEREAS, the RCPA prepared a programmatic Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to evaluate the potential adverse environmental impacts of implementing measures to reduce GHGs; and WHEREAS, the RCPA Board adopted Resolution Number 2016-002 certifying a Final EIR, making required findings under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for adoption, and adopting the Climate Action 2020 and Beyond: Regional Program for Sonoma County Communities; and WHEREAS, California River Watch filed a CEQA complaint against the RCPA challenging the adequacy of the EIR; and WHEREAS, RCPA’s attempts to defend certification in the trial court were unsuccessful and the judgement against the RCPA requires that the RCPA rescind the resolution certifying the EIR for CA2020. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the RCPA rescinds Resolution No 2016-002. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was moved by Director __________, seconded by Director __________, and adopted by the following vote:

Director Agrimonti Director Mansell Director Coursey Director Miller Director Gurney Director Rabbitt Director Gorin Director Russell Director Landman Director Salmon Director Mackenzie Director Zane

Ayes: _____ Noes: _____ Absent: _____ Abstain: _____

SO ORDERED I, the undersigned, certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority held on October 9, 2017. __________________________________ Suzanne Smith, Executive Director Clerk, Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority

52

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: RCPA Board of Directors

From: Lauren Casey, Director of Climate Programs

Item: 4.1.2 – Next steps for RCPA climate action (ACTION)* Date: October 9, 2017

Issue:

Shall the Board adopt a Resolution to adopt updated greenhouse gas (GHG) targets, and goals for reducing GHGs and preparing for climate impacts? Shall the Board promote a model resolution to RCPA members as an option to create consistent countywide policy impetus behind coordinated climate action?

Background:

The RCPA developed the Climate Action 2020 and Beyond Plan (CA2020) over the course of several years, with input from all local city councils, the Board of Supervisors, local government staff, expert consultants, community sustainability leaders, and hundreds of members of the public. It put forth a comprehensive framework for coordinated action on climate change including updated, long-term greenhouse gas reduction targets, broad policy goals to guide work to reduce GHGs and prepare for local climate impacts, and reduction measures customized to each RCPA Member Jurisdiction.

The Environmental Impact Report developed along with the Plan was intended as a tool to ensure that GHG reduction measure do not create adverse environmental impacts such as habitat loss or noise, and to make future implementation of those measures easier for local government and by private project developers. Unfortunately, the pursuit of this strategy for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) opened the plan to a successful legal challenge related to CEQA procedures. The RCPA Board opted not to pursue an appeal for various reasons (see item 4.1.1).

The judgment against the RCPA was frustrating for many reasons. It stalled and ultimately stopped local jurisdictions’ efforts to adopt the climate action plan, despite the work each jurisdiction put in to ensure the plan matched local priorities. The plaintiff has admitted in public forums that it supports the goals of the plan, and the implementation of measures within it, but stated that it brought the case because the project didn’t go far enough. Staff track policy guidance and expert opinions on the best approaches to community scale climate action planning, and guidance from state agencies and industry professionals continue to validate the RCPA approach to climate action planning.

For these reasons, RCPA staff propose that the CAP, while no longer enforceable as a CEQA tool, can still serve as an advisory resource for the RCPA’s work to coordinate countywide climate protection efforts. The ideas contained in the plan – to advance smart land use, resource efficiency, carbon free electricity, fuel switching, etc. – are still good and valid, and aligned with the climate action strategies articulated in the State Scoping Plan established to achieve the goals of AB 32 and SB 32.

To create more clear direction for RCPA staff on an ongoing basis, the Board may consider adoption of Resolution No 2017-003, officially updating our GHG reduction targets and policy goals to reduce GHGs and

53

prepare for local climate impacts. This resolution would achieve the same policy impetus behind climate action as would have the CA2020 Plan, but without the CEQA elements challenged by California River Watch.

The RCPA may also consider sharing the attached model resolution with each member jurisdiction, as a tool to codify updated commitments to the countywide collaboration on climate action, to update long term policy goals, and to consider pursuing the implementation of measures each jurisdiction had previously identified as good local opportunities. Taking this policy action at a city and county level would help create countywide consistency and clear guidance for RCPA and jurisdiction staff about coordinated implementation.

Even without a valid EIR, RCPA’s member agencies can still implement the measures in the plan if they either conduct CEQA review on the individual measures or find that the measures are exempt. In most instances, that should not be difficult and could be done with language like “that the adoption and implementation of the climate protection measures developed for the [jurisdiction] in Climate Action 2020 are categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to section 15308 of title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, because these measures constitute actions taken by a regulatory agency, as authorized by state or local ordinance, to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment.” The City of Sonoma did so upon adoption of its local measures, via the attached Resolution No 40-2016. Also, California River Watch has agreed to provide a signed letter on letterhead stating that it will not challenge the implementation of the measures.

In addition to pursuing the proposed policy action, the RCPA and/or its members may consider the following next steps:

• Evaluate updated approaches to GHG thresholds under CEQA. While the Plan cannot be used as a tool for making significance determinations for CEQA reviews of projects, the measures can be implemented. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District is beginning a process to update guidance for addressing GHGs under CEQA. RCPA staff will participate in this process and support local jurisdictions in considering how local thresholds may evolve.

• Pursue legislative solutions to avoid future CEQA challenges to beneficial projects. The RCPA may consider working with other stakeholders to pursue CEQA reform that protects environmentally beneficial emissions reduction actions from costly challenges that are contrary to CEQA’s basic purpose.

• Maintain a focus on implementation. With the enactment of SB 32, the State now has a 2030 target that can become the focus of GHG planning. The long term targets warrant increasingly deep reductions in GHG emissions, and for a scaling up in work to de-carbonize social systems. The RCPA will continue to explore funding and financing models that help implement the good ideas from the plan.

• Re-evaluate the RCPA approach to planning for the 2030 target. Unless CEQA reform happens, it is clear that future climate action plans must be developed with meticulous justification for methodology. State planning documents as well as other explanatory papers are already addressing this need, and RCPA will participate with other stakeholders.

• Support integration of climate action priorities within General Plans. All jurisdictions already have some climate policies in adopted general plans, and several have included goals and strategies from Climate Action 2020 in recent updates. As several other jurisdictions embark on General Plan updates, the RCPA Board and staff may serve as a resource to borrow analysis and ideas from prior

54

efforts as appropriate, to navigate General Plan and CEQA Guidelines, and to collaborate with other local jurisdictions.

In conclusion, RCPA staff are committed to minimizing the loss of momentum on climate action progress in Sonoma County however the Board sees fit.

Policy Impacts:

If adopted, these resolutions could provide some of the comprehensive policy framework that had been proposed in Climate Action 2020.

Fiscal Impacts:

None.

Staff Recommendation:

That the Board adopt Resolution No 2017-003 to update RCPA GHG targets and policy goals. That the Board promote the attached model resolution as a policy option for local jurisdictions to consider.

55

Resolution Number 2017-003 Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority

Santa Rosa, California October 9, 2017

A RESOLUTION OF THE REGIONAL CLIMATE PROTECTION AUTHORITY TO UPDATE ITS GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION TARGETS AND ESTABLISH POLICY GOALS TO REDUCE EMISSIONS AND PREPARE FOR THE LOCAL IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE.

WHEREAS, climate change is a real and increasingly urgent threat that demands action at every level of government; and WHEREAS, actions taken by local governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) provide multiple benefits by providing energy and cost savings, air quality and public health improvements, local job creation, resource conservation, climate resilience, and enhanced equity; and WHEREAS, the State of California has adopted policy targets to reduce GHGs by 40% from 1990 levels by 2030 and by 80% from 1990 levels by 2050; and WHEREAS, the RCPA was created to coordinate countywide climate protection efforts in the County of Sonoma; and WHEREAS, the success of the RCPA depends on the participation of and collaboration with all local jurisdictions, and a commitment to pool resources towards common goals; and WHEREAS, the RCPA has previously adopted GHG reduction targets that are no longer aligned with the State of California; and WHEREAS, the RCPA conducted a multi-year planning effort that was informed by each jurisdiction and hundreds of members of the community and that yielded recommendations for twenty goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and nine goals to prepare for local climate impacts; and WHEREAS, adopting the GHG reduction targets and policy goals that were developed in this planning effort will provide clear direction to RCPA staff in delivering on its Mission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the RCPA will work to reduce countywide greenhouse gas emissions by 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 and by 80% below 1990 levels by 2050; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the RCPA will reduce GHGs by pursuing implementation actions that support the following policy goals:

1. Increase building energy efficiency 2. Increase renewable energy use 3. Switch equipment from fossil fuel to electricity 4. Reduce travel demand through focused growth 5. Encourage a shift toward low-carbon transportation options 6. Increase vehicle and equipment fuel efficiency 7. Encourage a shift toward low-carbon fuels in vehicles and equipment 8. Reduce idling

56

Resolution Number 2017-003 Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority

Santa Rosa, California October 9, 2017

9. Increase solid waste diversion 10. Increase capture and use of methane from landfills 11. Reduce water consumption 12. Increase recycled water and greywater use 13. Increase water and waste-water infrastructure efficiency 14. Increase use of renewable energy in water and wastewater systems 15. Reduce emissions from livestock operations 16. Reduce emissions from fertilizer use 17. Protect and enhance the value of open and working lands 18. Promote sustainable agriculture 19. Increase carbon sequestration 20. Reduce emissions from the consumption of goods and services; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the RCPA will work to increase the health and resilience of social, natural, and built resources to withstand the impacts of climate change; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the RCPA will increase resilience by pursuing implementation actions that support the following policy goals:

1. Promote healthy, safe communities 2. Protect water resources 3. Promote as sustainable, climate-resilient economy 4. Mainstream the use of climate projections 5. Manage natural buffer zones around community resources 6. Promote agricultural preparedness and food security 7. Protect infrastructure 8. Increase emergency preparedness and prevention 9. Monitor climate change and its effects.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the RCPA seeks support from its member jurisdictions to collaborate towards the same GHG reduction targets and pursue common climate action goals; and THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was moved by Director __________, seconded by Director __________, and adopted by the following vote:

Director Agrimonti Director Mansell Director Coursey Director Miller Director Gurney Director Rabbitt Director Gorin Director Russell Director Landman Director Salmon Director Mackenzie Director Zane

Ayes: _____ Noes: _____ Absent: _____ Abstain: _____

SO ORDERED

57

Resolution Number 2017-003 Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority

Santa Rosa, California October 9, 2017

I, the undersigned, certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority held on October 9, 2017. __________________________________ Suzanne Smith, Executive Director Clerk, Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority

58

[JURSIDICTION]

Resolution # ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE [JURISDICTION] REAFFIRMING ITS INTENT TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AS PART OF A COORDINATED EFFORT THROUGH THE SONOMA COUNTY REGIONAL

CLIMATE PROTECTION AUTHORITY AND TO ADOPT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES AS IDENTIFIED IN CLIMATE ACTION 2020

WHEREAS, climate change is a real and increasingly urgent threat that demands action at every level of government; and WHEREAS, actions taken by local governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) provide multiple benefits by providing energy and cost savings, air quality and public health improvements, local job creation, resource conservation, climate resilience, and enhanced equity; and WHEREAS, the State of California has adopted policy targets to reduce GHGs by 40% from 1990 levels by 2030 and by 80% from 1990 levels by 2050; and WHEREAS, the [jurisdiction] has…[any specific actions related to Paris, US Mayor’s Climate Action Network, Under 2 MOU, etc.]; WHEREAS, the [jurisdiction] participates in a coordinated, countywide collaboration to address climate change via the Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority (RCPA); and WHEREAS, the RCPA has adopted the same GHG reduction targets as the State of California; and WHEREAS, the RCPA has established twenty goals to reduce GHG emissions and nine goals to prepare for local climate impacts; and WHEREAS, the RCPA and the [jurisdiction] collaborated through the Climate Action 2020 project to develop Measures specific to [jurisdiction] that will result in the reduction of GHG and result in substantial environmental and community benefits. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the [jurisdiction] agrees to work towards the RCPA’s countywide target to reduce GHG emissions by 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 and 80% below 1990 levels by 2050; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the [jurisdiction] adopts the following goals to reduce GHG emissions, and will pursue local actions that support these goals:

59

1. Increase building energy efficiency 2. Increase renewable energy use 3. Switch equipment from fossil fuel to electricity 4. Reduce travel demand through focused growth 5. Encourage a shift toward low-carbon transportation options 6. Increase vehicle and equipment fuel efficiency 7. Encourage a shift toward low-carbon fuels in vehicles and equipment 8. Reduce idling 9. Increase solid waste diversion 10. Increase capture and use of methane from landfills 11. Reduce water consumption 12. Increase recycled water and greywater use 13. Increase water and waste-water infrastructure efficiency 14. Increase use of renewable energy in water and wastewater systems 15. Reduce emissions from livestock operations 16. Reduce emissions from fertilizer use 17. Protect and enhance the value of open and working lands 18. Promote sustainable agriculture 19. Increase carbon sequestration 20. Reduce emissions from the consumption of goods and services; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the [jurisdiction] will continue to work to increase the health and resilience of social, natural, and built resources to withstand the impacts of climate change; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the [jurisdiction] has the goal of increasing resilience by pursuing local actions that support the following goals:

1. Promote healthy, safe communities 2. Protect water resources 3. Promote as sustainable, climate-resilient economy 4. Mainstream the use of climate projections 5. Manage natural buffer zones around community resources 6. Promote agricultural preparedness and food security 7. Protect infrastructure 8. Increase emergency preparedness and prevention 9. Monitor climate change and its effects.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the [jurisdiction] will support these goals through its own actions and through collaboration with other local governments through the efforts of the Regional Climate Protection Authority; and

60

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the [jurisdiction] intends to implement its local measures from the Climate Action 2020 planning project. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was duly adopted this ____ day of _____, 2017, by the following vote:

61

62

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: RCPA Board of Directors

From: Carolyn Glanton, Climate Action Coordinator

Item: 4.3.1 – RCPA Activities Report

Date: October 9, 2017

Issue:

Information only.

Background:

Planning and Coordination

RCPA Coordination Committee

The September meeting of the RCPA Coordination Committee featured a discussion about the results of the legal challenge to the Climate Action 2020 and Beyond Plan and on the future of climate action planning in Sonoma County. Attendees included member jurisdictions and community organizations.

Climate Action Staff Working Group

The Staff Working Group met on September 27th to discuss the outcome of the lawsuit and climate action (see item 4.1.1).

Sonoma County Zero Waste Task Force

RCPA staff is participating on the Zero Waste Task Force which is drafting a Zero Waste Policy for Sonoma County Cities and County for consideration. Staff will bring updates on that effort to the Board and RCPA committees.

Implementation

Bay Area Regional Energy Network

Bay Area Multifamily Building Enhancement Program

RCPA staff are hosting a Bay Area Multifamily Building Enhancements (BAMBE) program workshop on October 11th for multifamily property owners and managers. RCPA staff attended a California Apartment Association North Bay Property Managers’ Forum on September 13th to share information on the program and workshop.

Codes and Standards

RCPA staff have arranged a presentation on the topic of zero net energy (ZNE) at the October 10th Petaluma Planning Commission upon request. RCPA staff works with BayREN to support the efforts of local residents, businesses, and governments to help buildings achieve zero net carbon emissions. RCPA staff continues to

63

attend Redwood Empire Association of Code Officials (REACO) monthly meetings and discussed solar permitting.

Climate Action Advisory Committee

The CAAC met on October 6th to discuss RCPA programs including BayREN and Shift Sonoma County.

Funding

BAAQMD Charge! Program

The Bay Area Air Quality Management District solicitation to fund the installation of electric vehicle charging stations has been extended through November 3, 2017. The grant program will offset up to 75% of the cost of purchasing, installing, and operating new publicly available electric vehicle charging stations at qualifying facilities within BAAQMD’s jurisdiction. $5M is available for FYE 2017 on a first-come, first-served basis to public agencies and private businesses and is reimbursed after the project has been completed. RCPA are available to help develop and coordinate applications in Sonoma County, and have promoted this opportunity through the Planning Advisory Committee and Staff Working Group.

Outreach, Advocacy, and Education

Climate Action

On September 15th RCPA staff presented at the Sonoma County Library All Staff Day on Climate Action in Sonoma County.

BayREN

RCPA staff is working with the County of Sonoma, Energy and Sustainability Division to hold an energy code training on non-residential lighting on November 14th.

CivicSpark

The RCPA is participating the CivicSpark AmeriCorps program to increase local government capacity to address climate change. In 2017-2018, Julian Ruzzier-Gaul will join the RCPA and SCTA team as a CivicSpark fellow focused on climate action data management and evaluation. His primary project focus will be on updating communitywide GHG inventories and tracking climate action implementation progress.

Legislation

SB 564: Water Bill Savings Act (McGuire)

The RCPA worked with Senator McGuire to sponsor legislation that will enable the use of pooled revenue bonds to implement water efficiency financing programs based on the Pay As You Save (PAYS) model piloted by the RCPA and BayREN. It passed the legislature in September and was enrolled to the governor.

Policy Impacts:

None.

Fiscal Impacts:

None.

Staff Recommendation:

Information only.

64

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: Sonoma County Transportation Authority

From: Chris Barney, Senior Transportation Planner

Item: 4.2.1 - Update to Administrative and Operational Travel Demand Modeling Guidelines

Date: October 9, 2017

Issue:

The Administrative and Operational Travel Demand Modeling Guidelines document identifies and describes the policies, procedures, and protocols that are used to guide SCTA’s travel demand modeling program.

Background:

SCTA operates and maintains the Sonoma County Travel Model (SCTM) which is used to support SCTA’s transportation planning activities and to provide analytic and modeling support to the Authority’s member organizations. SCTA’s Administrative and Operational Travel Demand Modeling Guidelines are used by staff to guide the operation, maintenance, improvement, and administration of the SCTM. This document identifies:

• Modeling Goals and Objectives

• Program Products and Services

• Modeling Priorities

• Scope of the Modeling Program

• Intended Use of the Travel Model

• Model Maintenance and Improvement

• Data Dissemination

• Model Validation and Reasonableness Checking

• Modeling Program Evaluation

Policy Impacts:

This document is used to guide how the travel model is used, updated, and maintained and outlines how the model shall be used to support SCTA and local planning and project delivery efforts. The TAC, TAC and CAC have reviewed the document and provided input that has been incorporated.

Fiscal Impacts:

None at this time.

Staff Recommendation:

Consider approving the updated Administrative and Operational Travel Demand Modeling Guidelines.

65

Travel Demand Modeling at Sonoma

County Transportation

Authority

October 2017

66

What is a travel model?

A tool that is used to estimate:

• How – Drive alone, carpool, take transit, walk, bike?

• Where – Where does a trip start and end? Where do people travel from and where do they want to go?

• When – peak or off-peak?

• and Why – commute, travel to school, other travel?

people travel now and in the future.

67

Why do we have a travel model?

To analyze countywide transportation impacts

of future growth

Analyze impacts/benefits of

regional projects

Analyze performance of CTP and CTP projects

Provide modeling output, data, and

analytic support to SCTA’s member organizations

368

4

Regional

County/City

Area/Corridor

Major Roadway/LargerProject

Intersection/Small project

Micro Level

Macro Level

MTC Model

SCTAModel

LocalTraffic Studies

Travel Demand Modeling and Analysis in Sonoma County

69

What is SCTA’s role in modeling?• Maintain the countywide model• Coordinate with Bay Area Metro (ABAG/MTC) and

other local and regional modeling and planning staff on modeling and data analysis issues

• Analyze Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) performance

• Analyze SCTA project performance• Provide forecasts of existing and future travel and

transportation trends and conditions• Support local planning and provide modelling support

to local jurisdictions

570

SCTA Model Scale – Intended Use• County level model• Need detailed project information for future projects

(alignment of new roadway or transit service, # of lanes, speed limit, transit frequencies, etc).

• Analysis is limited to transportation/traffic impacts• Model data is often used as a starting point in the estimation

of other impacts (Air Quality, Noise, etc.). More detailed local data is often required to provide reliable results for local analysis.

• Model estimates travel for 24 hour work day, and AM/PM peak periods.

71

Model Limitations• Model is validated at countywide scale• Quality of output is reliant on the quality of data

provided by local planners and public works staff• Focused on countywide and regional impacts not

local impacts (though model data may serve as a starting point to analyze local conditions)

• Estimates average weekday conditions (daily and peak period) – not weekends or holidays

• Generalizes travel based on a limited number of housing types and travel destinations

• Limited ability to estimate travel beyond county boundary

772

8

Travel Forecasts

Transportation System

Population and

Employment Locations

Travel Behavior

How does the travel model work?

73

FourFour--StepStepRegional Regional TravelTravelDemand Demand ModelModel

Land usedata

Tripassignment

Modechoice

Tripdistribution

Tripgeneration

Highwayand transit

trips

TrafficVolume

forecasts

Zone-to-zoneTravel times,

Costs, etc.

Highwayand transitnetworks

Congested Traffic Speeds74

Trip Generation: How Much Travel?

Land Use Type UnitsDaily Vehicle

Trip EndsSingle Family D.U. 9.57Multi Family D.U. 6.5

Senior Housing /Mobilehomes D.U. 4Office 1,000 Sq.Ft. 11.01Hotel Rooms 8.17

Retail-Strip Commercial 1,000 Sq.Ft. 60Retail-Shopping Center 1,000 Sq.Ft. Formula

Industrial-Light 1,000 Sq.Ft. 6.97Industrial-Heavy 1,000 Sq.Ft. 1.5

Warehouse 1,000 Sq.Ft. 4.96Educational Students 1.4Institutional 1,000 Sq.Ft. 6.48

Recreational Acres 4.1Hospital Beds 11.81

75

Trip Distribution: Who Goes Where?

76

Mode Choice: How do people Travel?

77

Trip Assignment: What Routes do people take?

78

Two Models? – Base and Future

Base Year (2010)• What is happening now?• Checked against current conditions using traffic counts,

transit ridership, travel surveys, and other real world data.

Forecast Year (2040)• How will things be in the future?• Based on regional forecasts and general plans• Checked for reasonableness

79

Model Output

Travel statistics (VMT, GHG, Congestion)

Traffic/Transit Ridership forecasts along

roadways/transit lines (daily, AM/PM Peak

Hour)

Average Vehicle Speeds

Mode Shares (what travel modes are being

used?)

Information about where travelers are

going

Information about what types of trips people are

making

Level of Service/congestion

80

Model Validation/Model Accuracy Checks

• Model input and output is reviewed by local planning and engineering staff.

Model output compared to:• traffic counts• transit ridership• bike/pedestrian counts• Bay area travel survey, CA statewide travel survey• US Census• MTC model, other travel models• Checked for overall reasonableness

81

Model Administrative Guidelines – Outlines the guiding policies of the SCTA modeling program

Modeling goals, objectives, and priorities

Model scale, scope, and format

Products and services – data distribution

Model maintenance and improvement

Model validation

Ongoing evaluation of the modeling program

1782

Next month…

Model improvement consultant Request for Proposals (RFP) covering:• Sonoma County Travel Behavior Study• Collection of regional and countywide origin

and destination data• Travel model validation• Travel model improvements

1883

Questions?

84

Administrative and Operational Travel Demand

Modeling Guidelines

DRAFT

Sonoma County Transportation Authority

490 Mendocino Ave., Suite 206

Santa Rosa, CA 95401

(707) 565-5373

September 13, 2017

85

2

Table of Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................ 3 Program Administration .................................................................................... 3

Modeling Goals and Objectives ...................................................................................... 3 Scope of the Program ...................................................................................................... 4 Products and Services ..................................................................................................... 5 Modeling Priorities ......................................................................................................... 6 Coordination with other Modeling Efforts ..................................................................... 7

Technical and Operational Policies .................................................................. 7 Transportation System (Network) Updates .................................................................... 7 Land Use Data Updates .................................................................................................. 8 Data dissemination .......................................................................................................... 8 Model modification and improvement ............................................................................ 8 Training ........................................................................................................................... 9 Model Validation ............................................................................................................ 9

Program Evaluation ......................................................................................... 10

86

3

Introduction These guidelines describe the policies, procedures, and protocols guiding the Sonoma County Transportation Authority’s (SCTA) Travel Demand Modeling (TDM) program and were prepared to ensure that the Authority’s governing board, and all of its member agencies support and are aware of these policies, procedures, and protocols. This document describes the products and services that are available through the modeling program and outlines how these benefit SCTA’s and local planning activities. Program Administration

Many transportation projects and development projects that are proposed, designed, or built in Sonoma County require an analysis of the potential impacts the project may impose on local and regional transportation systems. The Sonoma County Travel Model is regularly used to quantify these impacts. In the past SCTA and local jurisdictions have relied on outside contractors to run travel demand models and to perform travel demand analysis. The SCTA modeling program has been configured to maintain and operate the travel model in-house. Routine model analysis and maintenance is performed by SCTA staff with outside consultants providing additional modeling support when necessary. By maintaining the countywide model in-house, SCTA is able to provide local control over the modeling process, and is better able to provide customized analysis for SCTA’s planning activities and for member organizations quickly, efficiently, and economically. SCTA’s modeling program provides in-house technical modeling expertise and allows SCTA’s member organizations to exercise direct control over the modeling process. Local engineering and planning staff are able to participate in model development and improvement by participating in modeling discussions at SCTA advisory committees (the Technical Advisory and Planning Advisory Committees primarily), or by working directly with SCTA modeling and technical staff. Modeling Goals and Objectives

SCTA’s modeling program supports the authority’s planning and programming functions as laid out by SCTA’s mission statement:

"As a collaborative agency of the cities and County of Sonoma, we work together to maintain and improve our transportation network. We do so by prioritizing, coordinating, and maximizing the funding available to us and providing comprehensive, countywide planning. Our deliberations and decisions recognize the diverse needs within our county and the environmental and economic aspects of transportation planning."

87

4

The modeling program helps the Authority fulfill its mission by analyzing the transportation impacts of future growth, analyzing the countywide and local impact of regional projects, providing a modeling framework that allows staff to analyze alternative modes of transport, and by providing local modeling expertise and control over the maintenance, improvement, and operation of the travel model.

SCTA’s planning goals are outlined in chapter 4 of the 2016 Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP). The travel demand model allows the authority to evaluate how different actions including project implementation and policy approaches can help SCTA achieve CTP goals. CTP Chapter 6 – Evaluating Plan Performance provides an overview of this process. The modeling program provides modeling support, data, and analysis to the authority’s member organizations, other public and private organizations, and the public at large. SCTA technical and modeling staff continues to work with local engineering and planning staff to ensure that model output and analysis is readily available to SCTA member agencies and their designates. Staff works regularly with members of the public to provide information and training on SCTA’s travel demand model, travel modeling and forecasting theory and practice, and information and data produced by the modeling program or other agencies and organizations.

Scope of the Program The Sonoma County Travel Model was developed with a focus on the HWY 101 corridor and the larger regional transportation system. Efforts have been made to provide more detail in other parts of the county by incorporating local travel models into the countywide model, but the program’s primary focus remains on countywide regional travel demand impacts and supporting SCTA’s long range regional transportation planning efforts. It is important to consider that travel demand model data in general and SCTM projections in particular have limitations and should be used to predict trends and provide a generalized idea about impacts and travel changes. Model output is highly dependent on the quality of input data that is provided by local jurisdictions, and should always be reviewed by local experts for reasonableness. Geographically, the SCTM is focused on the HWY 101 corridor and urbanized areas and the quality of the model output decreases as one moves away from these locations. The model is intended to allow analysis of transportation and traffic impacts of projects and policies that impact a number of different jurisdictions, or to analyze impacts within cities that have regional significance. The model was not designed to perform detailed traffic studies for more local projects, though the countywide model data is often used as a starting point for these types of analysis. The

88

5

current model extent ends at the county boundary with limited representations of important out of county destinations and is primarily focused on travel occurring within Sonoma County. The model estimates travel for 24-hour average work days, and for work day AM and PM peak commute periods and does not currently estimate travel for weekends or holidays. Disclaimers explaining these limitations and discussing the intended uses of the provided data are provided when the data is delivered to the requesting party. Products and Services The data and analysis provided by SCTA’s modeling program are used to support local and regional transportation planning and project development activities. Local agencies, their consultants, and the public often request model data or specialized analysis to support their planning and capital improvement activities or for informational purposes. SCTA staff has been faced with the challenge of trying to fill a variety of large and small data requests in a timely and efficient manner. In order to meet the majority of this demand, SCTA provides baseline model run data and associated modeling input data upon request. Although it is relatively straightforward to provide data from already completed model runs, it can require a significant amount of staff time to fill data requests that require changes to the model or enhancements to baseline datasets. Staff works with data requestors to schedule and prioritize model work and other analysis in order to maintain the program’s focus on supporting SCTA’s countywide and regional long range transportation planning priorities, while also providing customized analysis for local projects in a timely manner.

Unprocessed data that has been developed or provided by other organizations for use in the modeling program is not provided without the explicit permission of that organization. Staff refers individuals requesting data provided by other organizations to the data originator unless previous agreements or arrangements have been made for SCTA to distribute this information to requesting parties. Examples of data products made available through the modeling program:

• Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) estimates • Level of Service (LOS) estimates • Facility level existing and future traffic estimates • Average travel times • Average trip lengths • Vehicle and person trip estimates • Estimates of travel delay • Mode share estimates • Transportation bottleneck locations • Trip path selection estimates

89

6

• Countywide travel flow estimates • Future transit ridership • County, jurisdiction, and traffic analysis zone housing and employment

growth estimates • GIS or cartographic representations of model input and output

Modeling Priorities The travel model is being continuously updated and improved. The following list of modeling tasks and improvement priorities was assembled in conjunction with SCTA’s modeling subcommittee and advisory committees. These priorities are re-evaluated on an ongoing basis and revised as necessary.

Tasks have not been prioritized individually but have been divided into work task groupings that will be addressed by staff in the short, mid, and long term. Short-term tasks are not necessarily more important than long-term tasks and vice versa.

Short-term or ongoing tasks (ongoing or to be completed over the next year):

• Provide baseline (2015) and projected year (2040) model projections in easily usable formats (Excel and GIS formats).

• Update current land use data and evaluating projection year (2040) data for possible update and changes based on new information.

• Maintain and update general plan buildout model estimates. • Track local pending development and permitted projects and

ensuring that these projects are reflected in model forecasts. • Update model transportation networks. • Prepare specialized data products. • Evaluate non-Measure M projects. • Revalidate travel model using 2015 traffic counts, transit ridership,

active transportation counts, and transportation surveys and data.

Mid-term tasks (to be completed over the next 1-3 years): • Analyze travel demand impacts of Measure M projects – to be

completed as part of the next CTP update. • Analyze travel demand impacts of other projects of regional

significance (next CTP update). • Improve modeling capability to analyze alternative modes. • Improve model capabilities for analyzing tourism, visitor, and

special event travel. • Develop non-peak hour and weekend modeling methodology and

data-sets.

Long-term tasks (to be completed as resources allow): • Shift to activity based modeling framework.

90

7

• Expand geographic coverage of travel model beyond county boundary.

Coordination with other Modeling Efforts SCTA staff compares SCTM output, assumptions, and methodology with regional, county, and jurisdictional travel demand models in the San Francisco Bay Area region. Efforts are made to coordinate modeling efforts within Sonoma County with other existing regional and local models where possible. Staff attends regional travel demand modeling workshops and user group meetings to stay informed on regional model developments, and will keep up to date on any local modeling efforts being undertaken by Sonoma County cities. Technical and Operational Policies

SCTA’s travel demand modeling efforts focus predominately on maintaining and updating model inputs, running the model and interpreting model output, and model improvement and validation. STCM model inputs are maintained in GIS (geographic information system) and tabular databases, which can be seamlessly displayed and combined with other data maintained by SCTA staff and local jurisdictions. In previous versions of the SCTM, the model inputs and outputs were created without any geographic orientation and were maintained in proprietary formats which made exporting and displaying this information unwieldy and difficult. The transfer of model inputs and outputs into a GIS based database system has streamlined data maintenance and data sharing processes, allowing all model inputs to be maintained in a single system that is easy to use, and that most local staff and their consultants are able to access and work with easily. The quality of model estimates and output are only as good as the input data that is being used to run the model. As demographic, land use, and transportation network data improve and are more accurate, model projections are also be more reliable. Staff continues to incorporate demographic, development, and project completion data available from local jurisdictions, regional, state, and federal agencies, and other data sources into the travel model. Continuous model updates and improvements ensure that model inputs are current and accurate, and reflect current land use and travel conditions and trends in travel behavior. Transportation System (Network) Updates

The regional transportation system is represented in the travel model by simplified networks. These networks are coded with information representing road capacity, functional classification, average speeds, directional travel, headways and fares for transit, and facility location and connectivity. It is important that this information accurately represent the current state of the transportation system and that the future projected transportation network be a

91

8

good representation of what will be built in the future. Staff continues to monitor changes in Sonoma County’s transportation network and makes changes as necessary to ensure that representations of the existing and future transportation system are accurate. Future network additions are focused on Measure M projects, Caltrans projects, and local projects with significant regional importance and are consistent with the regional travel demand model (Travel Model One), Plan Bay Area 2040, and SCTA’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan. Land Use Data Updates

Historically updates to travel model land use inputs have coincided with the Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) update schedule. CTP updates generally occur on a four-year cycle. These major CTP updates are supplemented by intermittent updates as requested by local jurisdictions which are associated with project level analysis or local planning efforts. Staff will continue to maintain the major model update schedule associated with the CTP update and is working with local jurisdictions to develop a countywide permitted and pending development database which will be used to ensure that model land use assumptions are consistent with local planning activities and development trends. Staff uses universal data collection reporting methodologies to categorize and track housing, employment, and other growth in order to ensure that development data provided by different organizations is consistent countywide. Data dissemination

As discussed earlier in this document, model data products will be made available upon request including GIS and tabular versions of: input land use data for base (2015) and projected year (2040), model road and transit networks, travel demand projections by Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) and network section, and other standard model reports summarizing VMT, delay, travel times, and other transportation metrics. Any work requiring additional manipulation of the baseline model output shall be handled on a case-by-case basis and may require the data user to a pay market rate fee for the additional services being requested or shall enter into a formal agreement allowing the user to obtain a copy of the model for use outside the program.

Those requesting model inputs, outputs, scripts, or reports shall complete and submit a SCTM Data Request form to SCTA staff identifying the requesting individual/ organization, data/files requested, and data purpose (see Attachment A). Any changes or improvements to model files, inputs, or reports should be submitted to SCTA staff for possible inclusion in the countywide model. Model modification and improvement Over time a number of local travel models have been incorporated into the SCTM. Detail from the Santa Rosa, Rohnert Park, Windsor, and Petaluma travel demand models has been incorporated into the countywide model.

92

9

Functional and technical improvements are routinely made to the model when time and resources allow. Improvements have included changes and increases to model TAZs, network changes, additions or changes to model land use categories and trip generation formulas, improved reporting and visualization functionality, and coding efficiency changes. These structural changes and model improvements are undertaken when they are able to improve the quality and usability of the products produced by the modeling program.

Training

New modeling techniques, software, and GIS capabilities should be incorporated into the modeling program when they will improve the quality of the output, and/or make it easier to deliver model information to SCTA’s member organizations, their consultants, or the public. SCTA staff regularly participates in regional, statewide, and national technical modeling training programs and information exchange networks in order to keep up with recent developments and trends in travel demand modeling. Staff is also available to provide information on and provide training to local staff on the SCTM, travel modeling, and technical data analysis.

Model Validation

The model should be able to replicate observed conditions before being used to produce future-year forecasts. The Model Validation and Reasonableness Checking Manual published by the U.S. Department of Transportation (Federal Highways Administration – FHWA) provides guidance on how travel demand models should be validated and checked for reasonableness. SCTA bases its model validation procedure on the recommendations provided in this document.

Model validation is performed in conjunction with major model updates that precede updates to SCTA’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan. The services of independent consultants familiar with travel demand models and model validation are retained to assist staff with model validation.

Staff uses the following methods to validate the travel model:

• Check modeled countywide vehicle miles traveled and trips per person rates against typical values provided by FHWA and values reported by MTC and other counties for reasonableness.

• Compare predicted or modeled link volumes to ground traffic count volumes using available traffic counts. Peak hour and daily traffic count data is obtained from Caltrans and local jurisdictions. Link volume comparisons should be scattered across the countywide transportation system where ground counts are available, and should cover high and lower volume transportation system links. Staff

93

10

generates a list and map of network/transportation system links and available ground count locations in order to determine if steps should be taken to collect additional ground counts in locations where data is unavailable.

• Predicted/modeled link volumes should be within the deviation ranges to ground count volumes recommended by FHWA. Higher functional class links (freeways and principal arterials), which normal carry larger travel volumes (10,000 Annual Daily Traffic (ADT) and above), are recommended to be within a 7% deviation of ground counts, and lower functional class links (collectors or roads with volumes of 5,000 ADT and below) to be within a 25% deviation of ground counts.

• Check future trip generation, distribution, and link volume for reasonableness by comparing model results to regional and statewide model results, comparison to transportation trends, and consultation with SCTA advisory committees.

• Compare predicted or modeled mode shares and transit ridership to existing transit ridership counts and historical/observed mode share rates (US Census, Bay Area and CA Statewide travel surveys).

• Land use audits – Model land use inputs are reviewed using visual and tabular representations of this data. Outliers and gaps are identified and corrected as necessary. Draft model run results are used to identify possible errors or omissions in land use inputs.

• Transportation network audits - Model networks are reviewed using various visual representations and tabular versions of input transportation network data. Draft model run results will often quickly highlight any errors or omissions in model transportation networks. Corrections and revisions are made as necessary.

• Dynamic Validation/Sensitivity Testing – Dynamic validation tests the model’s ability to respond reasonably to changes in inputs. Changes to land use, road networks, transit service, travel costs, and transportation policies are tested as part of the SCTM dynamic validation process.

Program Evaluation In order to ensure the long term viability of the program, it is critical that the program be periodically reevaluated. Staff will work with SCTA advisory committees to evaluate the model program and to recommend changes to the modeling program or it’s associated policies periodically.

94

11

From an administrative standpoint the following questions will be used to assess the performance of the program:

• Is the SCTM being primarily used to support the planning priorities of SCTA?

• Is the SCTM being adequately maintained and does it accurately represent current and expected countywide travel?

• Are the data products and analytical services available through the program sufficient for SCTA and local planning needs?

• Is there a significant unmet data need that would warrant changes to the model, model focus, or data products available through the modeling program?

From a technical/operational standpoint, the following performance criteria will be used to evaluate the adequacy of the modeling program:

• Can the existing structure and functionality of the SCTM be used to adequately support the long range planning priorities of the SCTA?

• Are existing land use update procedures and protocols working? • Is there a significant deficiency in model outputs that would warrant a

major reconfiguration of the existing model? Staff will routinely review the status of the modeling program and will address any deficiencies as resources allow. Staff will conduct a comprehensive review of program operations and model performance during each major model update and will make recommendations for addressing possible deficiencies. Staff will work with SCTA advisory committees to perform this comprehensive program review as part of the CTP update cycle.

95

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA | 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Sonoma County Transportation Authority Travel Model Data Request Form

Firm/Organization: __________________________________________________________________ Requested by: ______________________________________________________________________ Address: Street: _______________________________________________________________

City/State/Zip: ________________________________________________________

Phone/Fax: ___________________________________________________________

E-mail: _______________________________________________________________ Project/Application: Detailed description of requested data/files (include formats, model run years, etc.): Purpose/Use of requested data: I understand and agree to the following terms related to the use of the request data/files: Travel model files prepared by SCTA including the associated input and output files, were developed for use by SCTA for countywide planning purposes. The appropriate use of such data in other planning programs and studies must be determined entirely by the planners and analysts of the firm or agency undertaking such projects. SCTA makes no warranties, expressed or implied, of the appropriateness or accuracy of any results or opinions derived from any project not conducted or sponsored by SCTA utilizing SCTA's technical data. SCTA welcomes verifiable modifications that would enhance the integrity of the modeling process or input/output files. Please provide a detailed list of any model file modifications and a justification for any modifications to SCTA staff at the conclusion of this project. Signed: _______________________________________ Date: _________________ Mail, Email, or Fax to: Chris Barney, Senior Transportation Planner

cbarney@sctainfo.org; fax: (707) 565-5370

96

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: Sonoma County Transportation Authority

From: Janet Spilman, Director of Planning

Item: 4.2.2 – Review of traffic mitigation fees and projects

Date: October 9, 2017

Issue: Should the SCTA review and update projects eligible for regional traffic mitigation fees collected by the City of Rohnert Park as per SCTA Agreement SCTA05003?

Background: In 2006, the City of Rohnert Park applied to LAFCO for permission to annex land now known as the University District. It was acknowledged by all parties that the project would have significant traffic impacts, both within and beyond City boundaries. The developer of the University District agreed to make payments to fund mitigation for those regional impacts.

It was determined that the SCTA was the most appropriate entity to hold these funds and was charged with allocating the funds to eligible projects via a to be determined process. At the time, traffic impacts in the Penngrove area were an unmitigated concern and a high priority for the County and the SCTA already had a financial commitment, through Measure M, to a project that would improve circulation in the Penngrove Area.

Development of the University District, imminent in 2007, took much longer as a result of the economic downturn the following year. Now in 2017, Rohnert Park has begun to collect fees and pass them to the SCTA as per the agreement.

In the intervening decade traffic conditions and project priorities have shifted. A review of the potential projects described the original agreement should be undertaken with Rohnert Park staff and legal counsel to determine the best and most appropriate use of the funds moving forward.

Policy Impacts:

The concept of regional traffic mitigation fees has been discussed several times since 2002. The tension was historically trying to balance the needs of existing residents and impacts of new development. The vast difference between the amount of potential funds collected from new development and the high cost of infrastructure projects diminished the viability of a regional fee program until Measure M was approved by voters to help relieve the traffic impacts from existing residents.

97

Financial Impacts:

A total of $704,831.85 in Regional Traffic Mitigation Funds have been received to date from the City of Rohnert Park.

Recommended Action:

Direct staff to work with the City of Rohnert Park and legal counsel to review the Agreement and identify and analyze potential projects. Staff would return to SCTA with a process to determine an appropriate list of projects at a later date.

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: SCTA Board of Directors

From: Suzanne Smith, Executive Director

Item: 4.3.1 – report out on the Measure M Ad Hoc Committee

Date: October 9, 2017

Issue:

What is the status of the work being conducted by the Measure M Ad Hoc Committee related to a potential ballot measure in November 2018?

Background:

The Measure M Ad Hoc Committee has been meeting since November 2016 to discuss the process, timing and approach to a possible sales tax measure extension in November 2018.

To date, the Ad Hoc has met with stakeholders, discussed pavement condition data, assessed transit data and developed a draft maintenance of effort policy. The Ad Hoc presented a straw man proposal to the Board in March 2017 and is still using that as the basis for discussion about the content of an expenditure plan.

Since the Ad Hoc was created, two significant transportation efforts have been undertaken at the State and regional level that could impact the content of an expenditure plan – Senate Bill 1 and Regional Measure 3. The primary impact of these funding programs is related to completing Highway 101 in Petaluma. Unfortunately, the timing for both programs is such that the Board may not know until May or June 2018, if we will be able to secure funding for Highway 101. The uncertainty in timing is based on several factors:

• SB1 processes for the Solutions for Congested Corridors program will be completed in May 2018

• SB1 is facing a challenge and a ballot measure to rescind the program could be before California voters in 2018

• Regional Measure 3 is awaiting signature by the Governor; if approved it will go to voters in 2018

The Ad Hoc Committee will continue to work on elements of the expenditure plan concepts and will report out to the full Board throughout the process.

Policy Impacts:

None.

Fiscal Impacts:

None.

Staff Recommendation:

No action is required.

113

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: RCPA Board of Directors

From: Lauren Casey, Director of Climate Programs

Item: 4.4 – Shift Sonoma County Plan (ACTION)* Date: October 9, 2017

Issue:

Shall the Board adopt the final Shift Sonoma County Low Carbon Transportation Action Plan?

Background:

The SCTA and RCPA were awarded a planning grant from the Strategic Growth Council to develop the Shift Sonoma County Plan, a low carbon transportation action plan. The purpose of the project was to assess the feasibility of various transportation solutions in Sonoma County, and to identify high priority local actions to implement them. The Comprehensive Transportation Plan and Climate Action 2020 and Beyond laid the foundations of this project, by identifying the role that transportation demand management, bike share, car share, and electric vehicles can play in achieving local climate and transportation goals.

The Public Draft version of the Plan was presented to the Board in July for feedback, prior to a two-month long outreach effort to solicit additional community and stakeholder input.

The outreach process included a series of public workshops and presentations, to local Councils, the Sonoma Clean Power Board, and SCTA/RCPA committees. In addition, the final plan was informed by input provided via a series of surveys:

• Shift Sonoma County Strategy Survey (September 2017, 59 participants) • Sonoma County Transportation Survey (January 2017, 327 participants) • Shift Sonoma County Market Surveys (2016) • Sonoma County Comprehensive Transportation Plan Survey (2015, 334 participants)

The feedback helped guide specific barriers that are addressed through the proposed actions from the Shift plan. As the plan leads to implementation of these strategies, public awareness and understanding of new mobility options will continue to be a priority and challenge. Staff also compiled feedback received from the Board and outreach process and tried to address as much as possible through final edits to improve the clarity and organization of the document, and make it more responsive to community priorities.

The following major updates were made:

• Added a section on equity to each strategy chapter, and added a map of local communities of concern • Added a marketing/outreach implementation section • Added a section on public outreach and plan development process

114

• Added some clarity about what this plan does/doesn’t do • Added a column to the action lists that identifies that implementing entities • Added citations, references, and additional general resources • Updated tables with titles and sources • Added recommended actions, per stakeholder input, including:

o Added an action to combine charging with solar carports/canopies o Added car dealerships to coordination section o Suggested "Standardization of price structures for charging stations countywide" per Local

Government EV Partnership input o Added language around Autonomous Vehicles and planning for the future o Added joining the West Coast Fleet Initiative o Added public-private partnerships to expand EV charging infrastructure in Sonoma County o Added policy recommendations favoring ridesharing when partnering with transportation

network companies o Added bike share education in lower income and non-English speaking communities o Added bike share partnerships with tourism-related businesses and bike shops o Added policy recommendations for reduced parking requirements when incorporating bike

share or car share in new developments • Combined similar actions for simplicity

Staff also made some grammatical and formatting improvements to make the document look and read better.

Next Steps

If the Board approves of the edits made in this final Plan, staff will publish it and post sections of it online in more accessible formats. The remainder of the Shift budget and scope will focus on marketing and outreach related to the Shift solutions, encouraging residents to utilize strategies and get out of their single occupancy vehicles, and supporting SCTA/RCPA members in using Shift toolkit resources to take priority actions.

Also, unlike traditional comprehensive plans, the Shift Plan is very implementation focused, and is therefore intended to be revised as new ideas emerge and lessons are learned. Staff anticipate updating data and recommendations within the Shift Plan in the future, without completing another multi-year planning effort.

Policy Impacts:

Low carbon transportation options are essential to the mission of both agencies and are in alignment with the 2016 Comprehensive Transportation Plan and the RCPA’s Regional Climate Action Plan. Adoption of the Final Shift Sonoma County Plan will provide direction to SCTA/RCPA staff on implementation priorities. Recommendations in the plan may also be considered for policy action in SCTA/RCPA Member jurisdictions.

Fiscal Impacts:

Work on the Shift Sonoma County Plan is funded by a Strategic Growth Council grant that must be completed by the end of calendar year 2017.

Staff Recommendation:

That the Board adopt the final Shift Sonoma County Low Carbon Transportation Action Plan and consider implementing actions within local jurisdictions.

115

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA | 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report

To: SCTA/RCPA Board of Directors

From: Brant Arthur, Community Affairs Specialist

Re: 4.5 – Community Affairs Update

Date: October 9, 2017 News

Highway 37

A series of four informational open houses on the Highway 37 Improvement Plan are being held in response to impacts from sea-level rise, flooding and increased traffic along the corridor. The counties of Marin, Napa, Sonoma and Solano, in partnership with Caltrans and the MTC, are planning to improve access and safety along Highway 37. The Open Houses will aim to:

- Inform residents and Highway 37 users about the status of the planning process; and - Provide an opportunity for participants to share their concerns and provide feedback.

Upcoming Home Energy Workshops

Residents are invited to attend a free workshop to learn about energy-efficiency, water-use efficiency, solar, financing options, and electric vehicles. The eleven workshops are hosted by The Sonoma County Library along with the Energy and Sustainability at libraries in Santa Rosa, Sonoma, Petaluma, Guerneville, Rohnert Park, Cloverdale, Windsor, and Healdsburg. See more details in Upcoming Events (below).

Adapting to Rising Tides

Staff attended a recent “Adapting to Rising Tides” (ART) working group meeting on addressing the threats to the Bay Area posed by climate change and sea level rise. The goals of the program are to increase resilience of Bay Area Transportation Systems, improve safety and increase public outreach and engagement on rising sea levels (among others). More info: http://www.adaptingtorisingtides.org/art-bay-area-regional-working-group-meeting-1/

Infrastructure Champion

SCTA/RCPA Chair David Rabbitt has been selected as “Infrastructure Champion Award of the Year” by the American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC)-CA North Coast Chapter. The award honors a public official who has made significant contributions toward development of critical community infrastructure.

116

Executive Director Suzanne Smith presented to the Taxpayer Association in September and will be attending the Bay Area Partnership Meeting on 10/2 and the Hwy 101 forum hosted by the Press Democrat, scheduled for 10/25.

Car sharing comes to Santa Rosa with Zipcar

Santa Rosa residents and employees can now take advantage of complimentary annual Zipcar memberships thanks to subsidies provided by a grant through the SCTA. Through the partnership, two Zipcars are now available for reservation in City-owned parking spots at the Downtown Santa Rosa Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) Station and in a surface lot downtown. To receive a discounted membership, visit Zipcar.com/SantaRosa.

Upcoming Events

• 9/27 - Hwy 37 Open House, 6-8 pm, American Canyon Council Chambers 4381 Broadway Street, American Canyon

• 9/27 - Home Energy Workshop, 6:30 - 8:00 p.m., Guerneville Regional Library, 14107 Armstrong Woods Rd., Guerneville, http://sonomacounty.ca.gov/energy

• 9/28 - Hwy 37 Open House, 6-8 pm, Sonoma Veterans Memorial Building 126 First Street West, Sonoma

• 10/2 - Hwy 37 Open House, 6-8 pm, Vallejo Naval and Historical Museum 734 Marin Street, Vallejo

• 10/4 - Home Energy Workshop, 6:30 - 8:00 p.m., Windsor Regional Library, 9291 Old Redwood Hwy., Windsor, http://sonomacounty.ca.gov/energy

• 10/18 - Home Energy Workshop, 6:30 - 8:00 p.m., Rohnert Park Regional Library, 6250 Lynne Conde Way, Rohnert Park, http://sonomacounty.ca.gov/energy

• 10/25 - Charge! Webinar, 1:30-2:30 PM, http://www.baaqmd.gov/grant-funding/businesses-and-fleets/charge

• 10/25 - Home Energy Workshop, 6:30 - 8:00 p.m., Central Santa Rosa Library, 211 E St., Santa Rosa, http://sonomacounty.ca.gov/energy

• 11/1 - Home Energy Workshop, 6:00 - 7:30 p.m., Cloverdale Regional Library, 401 North Cloverdale Blvd., Cloverdale, http://sonomacounty.ca.gov/energy

Partner news SCP Drive EverGreen Program

Sonoma Clean Power’s Drive EverGreen is back and as of 9/25 187 EVs have been sold or leased using the program. Customers of Sonoma Clean Power can save thousands with purchase credits and incentives on EVs at local dealers: Jim Bone Kia & Nissan, Hansel BMW, Hansel Ford, Hansel Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz of Santa Rosa and Platinum Chevrolet. The program also offers discounts on used vehicles from Nissan, BMW and Tesla. The program runs until 10/31/2017, while discounted charging equipment will be available through 6/30/2018. Learn more at DriveEV.org.

117

Social media / Community outreach / Media coverage SCTA Facebook:

● 457 likes (+10 in the last month) ● 9,331 people reached in the last month

RCPA Facebook:

● 524 likes (+2 in the last month) ● 2,421 people reached in the last month

CA37 Facebook:

● 210 likes (+7 since last month) ● 895 people reached in the last month

Newsletter:

● Monthly newsletters for SCTA and RCPA were sent on July 18 and August 16, 2017 ● The SCTA newsletter was sent to 367 recipients with a 29% open and 7% click rate ● The RCPA newsletter was sent to 186 recipients with a 39% open and 9% click rate

Other notes:

● SCTA website is averaging 135 visits/day ● RCPA website is averaging 68 visits/day ● Top RCPA webpages are the Homepage, Shift, Contact, Library, and SR 37 pages ● Top SCTA webpages are the Homepage, CA2020, About, and Collaboration pages. ● Twitter has lower public interest (SCTA has 62 followers, RCPA has 96 and SR37 has 8)

118

Media Highway 37 toll floated to hasten flood fixes, repairs Marin Independent Journal – September 3, 2017 http://www.marinij.com/article/NO/20170903/NEWS/170909918 Agency won’t appeal successful legal challenge of Sonoma County climate action plan The Press Democrat – September 14, 2017 http://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/7417512-181/agency-wont-appeal-successful-legal $4.4 Billion Bay Area Transportation Plan — to Be Paid for by Higher Bridge Tolls — Sent to Governor KQED - September 15, 2017 https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2017/09/15/sb-595-bay-area-transportation-plan-regional-measure-3/ Highway 37: Marin officials seek solutions for flood-prone road Marin Independent Journal – September 21, 2017 http://www.marinij.com/general-news/20170921/highway-37-marin-officials-seek-solutions-for-flood-prone-road Rebuild State Route 37 to address sea level rise and traffic San Francisco Chronicle – September 21, 2017 http://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/article/Rebuild-State-Route-37-to-address-sea-level-rise-12219708.php Officials eye funding for Highway 101 widening Argus-Courier - September 21, 2017 http://www.sonomanews.com/news/7445589-181/officials-eye-funding-for-highway?artslide=0

119

Photos:

New six lane bridge over San Antonio creek ready for concrete to be poured

Drive Electric Day, 9/9/17

Shift Workshop, 9/14/17

120

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: SCTA Board of Directors

From: Suzanne Smith, Executive Director James Cameron, Director of Projects and Programming

Item: 4.6.1– FY17/18 Measure M Final Budget

Date: October 9, 2017

Issue:

Shall the SCTA adopt a final budget for Measure M for FY17/18?

Background:

By October of each year, the SCTA must adopt three Final Budgets in order for operations to continue. The three budgets cover the SCTA general operations, Measure M and the Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA).

This staff report covers the FY17/18 Measure M Final Budget. Prior year information is included with FY16/17 actual revenues and expenditures.

Under the Measure M program, the SCTA must adopt a summary budget that includes all the individual budgets for each program category included in the Measure as well as separate budgets for the bond proceeds and bond debt service. Once revenue for the full sales tax program has been estimated it is then assigned to each program category based on the percent prescribed in Measure M. The Measure M Final Budget also includes anticipated expenses related to projects and administration within each program category. This budget action enables Measure M funds to be kept separately from other SCTA funds.

The Measure M Final Budget for FY17/18 has been prepared assuming a 3% growth in sales tax revenue projection over the FY16/17 actual sales tax revenues. The sales tax revenue projections are based on revenues received from the Board of Equalization (BOE). BOE revenues are received approximately three months behind fiscal year reporting timelines. Per generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), SCTA reports revenues when they are earned and can be measured. Due to the length of time between when SCTA earns sales tax revenues and when the BOE sends those funds to the SCTA, SCTA needs to establish a sales tax receivable at the end of each fiscal year. The County’s Enterprise Financial System (EFS) entry is made by projecting the revenues for the first two months of the next fiscal year to estimate the final year-end sales tax revenue amount. Therefore, the first two months of sales tax revenues in FY17/18 are booked as receivables in EFS FY16/17. As a result, BOE revenues and EFS sales tax revenues are out of sync at the same moment in time.

In addition to sales tax revenue, the Measure M Final Budget for FY17/18 includes a projection on interest earned on deposits as well as reimbursements from other agencies based on cooperative agreements. Reimbursement revenue includes anticipated deposits from the City of Petaluma for design of the Rainier structure as part of MSN-C2, deposits from the City of Petaluma for the close out of the Old Redwood Highway

121

Interchange with the Highway 101 Central-C project, and deposits from Caltrans Local Assistance for the federally reimbursable design of the Highway 101 Marin Sonoma Narrows Median Widening project (MSN B2 Phase 2).

The Measure M Final Budget also includes anticipated expenses related to projects and administration based on the 2017 Measure M Strategic Plan, programming actions approved by the Board since the adoption of the 2017 Measure M Strategic Plan, and the most recent cash flow model. The Measure M Cash Flow Model incorporates audited sales tax revenues. The expenditures associated with Measure M are focused on project costs and administration. The FY17/18 Measure M Final Budget includes funding for all of the program categories including the following specific items:

• Project allocations including construction capital & support, right-of-way capital & support, conservation mitigation credits, and pre-construction project development phases

• Consultant services from URS (AECOM) and BKF for design services for Highway 101; Parsons Transportation for design of the 116/121 intersection, KNN for financial advisory services; VCA for project management; and Pisenti & Brinker, LLP, for audit services

• Accounting services

• Legal services (including legal services related to right-of-way acquisitions on Hwy 101 projects)

• Office expenses and printing services

• SCTA staff

• Interest and principal from the passenger rail program to the LSP program for a $2.8 Million 2014 inter-program loan.

• Bond interest and principal payments for 2011 Bonds and 2015 Bonds.

There are no planned loans from the LSP program to the Bike/Pedestrian program in FY 17/18. The current Cash Flow Model predicts a $20,000 Loan from LSP program to the Bike/Pedestrian program will be needed in FY 18/19. The loan from the LSP program to the Rail program approved in FY 13/14 began repayment to LSP in FY14/15 and will continue through FY20/21.

Policy Impacts:

None.

Fiscal Impacts:

Sales tax revenues (BOE revenues) for FY16/17 increased 4.3% over FY15/16 revenues. SCTA is projecting that revenues will continue to grow at a 3% rate for FY17/18. Expenditures are anticipated due to both project development work and construction operations on Highway 101 projects, Local Streets Projects, and Bicycle and Pedestrian projects.

The Measure M Cash Flow Model incorporates all the planned expenditures, anticipated revenues and reserve funds for Hwy 101 projects, a positive balance for the LSP program, and positive balance (including the FY18/19 loan from the LSP program) for the Bike/Pedestrian program. The Local Streets Rehabilitation (LSR), Local Bus Transit (LBT), and Administration programs will continue to receive allotted payments based on actual sales tax revenues.

122

Staff Recommendation:

The SCTA must adopt a Measure M Final Budget for FY17/18 by October 31, 2017. The SCTA should consider the proposed Measure M Final Budgets and summary and, if they meet with the Board’s approval, adopt the Final Budget. Adoption of Resolution No. 2017-026 adopting the FY17/18 Measure M Final Budget requires a 2/3-majority vote. Therefore, the budget MUST receive eight (8) affirmative votes to pass.

123

BOE YTD % ChangeFY04/05 1,145,033.38$ FY05/06 17,324,361.72$ FY06/07 19,555,567.21$ 12.88%FY07/08 18,849,654.14$ -3.61%FY08/09 17,046,017.97$ -9.57%FY09/10 15,351,089.59$ -9.94%FY10/11 16,311,451.92$ 6.26%FY11/12 17,609,444.65$ 7.96%FY12/13 19,247,107.08$ 9.30%FY13/14 20,829,458.29$ 8.22%FY14/15 21,272,759.23$ 2.13%FY15/16 21,999,537.16$ 3.42%FY16/17 22,944,968.90$ 4.30%

BOE - Board of Equalization Deposits.Depostis are estimates which are 2 months behind the sales tax being collected.Estimated monthly BOE deposits then receive a quarterly true‐ up. 

Fiscal Year Revenue Re-Cap as of 6/30/2017

 $15

 $16

 $17

 $18

 $19

 $20

 $21

 $22

 $23

 $24Millions

Measure M Board of Equalization Sales Tax Revenues as of 6/30/17

124

SCTA Resolution Number 2017-026 Sonoma County Transportation Authority

Santa Rosa, California October 9, 2017

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SONOMA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, COUNTY OF SONOMA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE MEASURE M FINAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017/2018.

WHEREAS, a Measure M Final Budget for Fiscal Year 2017/2018 has been prepared by the Executive Director, reviewed by the Sonoma County Transportation Authority and attached as Exhibit A.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Measure M Final Budget for Fiscal Year 2017/2018 for the Sonoma County Transportation Authority, attached hereto and marked Exhibit A, is hereby adopted.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Executive Director, acting as Clerk of the Authority, shall deliver a certified copy of this resolution to the Sonoma County Auditor-Controller.

THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was moved by Director ___, seconded by Director ___, and approved by the following vote:

Director Agrimonti Director Mansell Director Coursey Director Miller Director Gorin Director Rabbitt Director Gurney Director Russell Director Landman Director Salmon Director Mackenzie Director Zane

Ayes: ____ Noes: __ Absent: __ Abstain: __ SO ORDERED I, the undersigned, certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Sonoma County Transportation Authority held on October 9, 2017. ______________________________________ Suzanne Smith, Executive Director Clerk, Sonoma County Transportation Authority

125

Exhibit A

Actual Budgeted Actual Final FinalDescription FY 15-16 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 16-17 FY 17-18

Sales/Use Tax Receipts 21,561,037 21,518,717 22,525,269 22,207,870 23,201,027 State - Other (Caltrans) 409,810 561,000 1,241,691 1,155,000 345,000 County - 369,000 - - - City of Petaluma - 1,610,000 - 263,000 50,000 Interest on Pooled Cash 331,836 190,080 479,986 233,116 287,500 Interest Earned 17,700 16,419 23,420 19,000 16,000 Donations/Reimbursements 206 500 310 500 500 Prior Year Revenue - - - - - Prior Year Revenue - State 119,000 - 67,071 - Transfer in within a Fund 809,754 21,084 - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Bond-Premium - - - - - Advances (450,000) (500,000) 400,000 400,000 410,000 Advances - Clearing 450,000 500,000 (400,000) (400,000) (410,000)

Total Revenues 23,249,343 24,286,800 24,337,747 23,878,486 23,900,027

Check balance 23,249,343 24,286,800 24,337,747 23,878,486 23,900,027 Variance - - - - -

Administration Costs 10,875 10,800 6,275 14,000 14,000 Audit Services 12,391 22,000 10,884 22,000 22,000 Fiscal Accounting 30,075 40,500 24,063 35,000 41,000 Legal Services 256,380 630,000 16,278 220,000 220,000 Training-In-ServiceConsultants 993,579 2,647,000 1,196,319 4,015,000 4,020,000 PermitsOutside Printing Services 1,251 500 4,439 13,000 13,000 SCTA Staff Time 187,100 200,000 272,254 265,000 265,000 Public/Legal Notices - 250 - - - Rents/Leases-Buildings 37,000 37,000 37,000 37,000 54,000 Travel Expense 6,392 19,000 7,851 19,000 19,000 CommunicationCounty Services Contract 6,805 17,000 6,409 17,000 2,500 EFS Charges 1,500 Memberships 2,850 5,500 2,800 6,000 6,000 Misc Expenses 2,249 1,910 165 1,660 1,660 Office Expense - 2,000 - 2,000 2,000 Books/Periodicals - 500 - - - Printing Services - 12,500 - - - Postage - 2,000 28 2,000 2,000 Conservation Credits - 15,000 - 15,000 15,000 Professional Development 1,073 3,000 1,828 3,000 3,000 LT Debt - Principal Payments 6,105,000 6,105,000 6,135,000 6,139,000 6,379,000 LT Debt - Interest Payments 3,056,586 3,039,078 3,030,400 3,015,413 2,775,012 Debt- Interest Other - 24,000 - 19,000 20,000 Debt Issuance Costs 689 2,000 - - - Contributions to Other Govts 12,199,960 31,832,925 8,131,505 22,381,526 27,736,918 Other FinancingTransfers out within a Fund 809,754 21,084 - - - Advances 450,000 1,500,000 400,000 400,000 410,000 Advances Clearing (450,000) (1,500,000) (400,000) (400,000) (410,000)

Total Expenses 23,720,011 44,690,547 18,883,498 36,241,599 41,612,590 23,720,011 44,690,547 18,883,498 36,241,599

- - - - Beginning Fund Bal. 50,414,388 50,414,388 50,503,170 50,503,170 56,462,719 Revenues 23,249,343 24,286,800 24,337,747 23,878,486 23,900,027 Expenses (23,720,011) (44,690,547) (18,883,498) (36,241,599) (41,612,590) Adjustments 559,448 - 505,300 (400,000) 7,000,000 Change in Encumbrances - - - - - Change in Fund Balance 88,781 (20,403,747) 5,959,549 (12,763,113) (10,712,563) Ending Fund Bal. 50,503,169 30,010,641 56,462,719 37,740,057 45,750,156

Sonoma County Transportation AuthorityMeasure M FY 2017-2018 Final Budget

Budget Summary for All Programs

J:\SCTA Staff\Budget\FY17-18\FY17-18 Final Budget\ Summary 9/25/20175:19 AM126

Dept ID: 70030100 Fund 74651

Actual Budgeted Actual Final FinalAccount Description FY 15-16 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 16-17 FY 17-18

40301 Sales/Use Tax 215,610 215,187 225,253 222,079 232,010 44002 Interest on Pooled Cash 2,375 1,560 3,997 1,952 2,000 46029 Donations/Reimbursements 206 500 310 500 500

Total Revenues 218,191 217,247 229,560 224,531 234,510

51206 Audit Services 12,391 22,000 10,884 22,000 22,000 51207 Fiscal Accounting 30,075 35,000 24,063 35,000 41,000 51211 Legal Services 866 20,000 1,397 20,000 20,000 51226 Consultants 8,898 15,000 4,599 15,000 30,000 51241 Outside Printing & Binding 1,251 - 4,439 12,500 12,500 51249 SCTA Staff Time 37,600 40,000 41,262 40,000 40,000 51421 Rents/Leases-Buildings 37,000 37,000 37,000 37,000 54,000 51602 Travel Expense 5,979 9,000 7,591 9,000 9,000 51916 County Services Contract 6,805 17,000 6,409 17,000 2,500 51919 EFS Charges - - - - 1,500 52091 Memberships 2,850 5,500 2,800 6,000 6,000 52101 Misc Expense 22 20 2 20 20 52111 Office Expense - 2,000 - 2,000 2,000 52116 Printing Services - 12,500 - - 52163 Professional Development 1,073 3,000 1,828 3,000 3,000

Total Expenses 144,811 218,020 142,273 218,520 243,520

Beginning Fund Balance 312,062 312,062 390,399 390,399 482,739 Revenues 218,191 217,247 229,560 224,531 234,510 Expenses (144,811) (218,020) (142,273) (218,520) (243,520) Adjustments 4,957 - 5,053 - - Change in Encumbrances - - - - - Change in Fund Balance 78,337 (773) 92,340 6,011 (9,010) Ending Fund Balance 390,399 311,289 482,739 396,410 473,730

Sonoma County Transportation AuthorityMeasure M FY 2017-2018 Final Budget

Administration (1%)

J:\SCTA Staff\Budget\FY17-18\FY17-18 Final Budget\MM Final Budget FY17-18.xlsx Admin 9/25/2017 5:19 AM127

Dept ID: 70030200Fund 74652

Actual Budgeted Actual Final FinalAccount Description FY 15-16 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 16-17 FY 17-18

40301 Sales/Use Tax 4,312,207 4,303,744 4,505,054 4,441,574 4,640,205 44002 Interest on Pooled Cash 5,694 5,000 9,521 5,000 6,000

Total Revenue 4,317,901 4,308,744 4,514,575 4,446,574 4,646,205

52101 Misc Expense 450 300 33 300 300 53501 Contributions to Other Govts. 4,404,621 4,904,323 4,597,976 5,054,123 5,271,380

Total Expenses 4,405,071 4,904,623 4,598,009 5,054,423 5,271,680

Beginning Fund Balance 595,879 595,879 607,849 607,849 625,475 Revenues 4,317,901 4,308,744 4,514,575 4,446,574 4,646,205 Expenses (4,405,071) (4,904,623) (4,598,009) (5,054,423) (5,271,680) Adjustments 99,140 101,060 Change in Encumbrances - - - - - Change in Fund Balance 11,970 (595,879) 17,625 (607,849) (625,475) Ending Fund Balance 607,849 - 625,475 0 0

Sonoma County Transportation AuthorityMeasure M FY 2017-2018 Final Budget

Local Street Repairs (LSR - 20%)

J:\SCTA Staff\Budget\FY17-18\FY17-18 Final Budget\MM Final Budget FY17-18.xlsx LSR 9/25/2017 5:19 AM128

Dept ID: 70030300Fund 74653

Actual Budgeted Actual Final FinalAccount Description FY 15-16 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 16-17 FY 17-18

40301 Sales/Use Tax 4,312,207 4,303,744 4,505,054 4,441,574 4,640,205 44002 Interest on Pooled Cash 116,640 88,025 186,174 86,930 90,000 44003 Interest Earned 17,510 16,419 18,987 19,000 16,000 49002 Advances (450,000) (500,000) 400,000 400,000 410,000 49003 Advances - Clearing 450,000 500,000 (400,000) (400,000) (410,000)

Total Revenue 4,446,358 4,408,188 4,710,215 4,547,504 4,746,205

51226 Consultants 487,108 1,025,000 370,985 2,000,000 1,900,000 52101 Misc Expense 450 300 33 300 300 53501 Contributions to Other Govts. 2,476,915 12,499,000 578,086 8,600,000 6,500,000 59002 Advances - 1,000,000 - - 59003 Advances Clearing - (1,000,000) - -

Total Expenses 2,964,473 13,524,300 949,103 10,600,300 8,400,300

Beginning Fund Balance 15,305,023 15,305,023 17,386,049 17,386,049 21,648,220 Revenues 4,446,358 4,408,188 4,710,215 4,547,504 4,746,205 Expenses (2,964,473) (13,524,300) (949,103) (10,600,300) (8,400,300) Adjustments 599,140 - 501,060 - 410,000 Change in Encumbrances - - - - - Change in Fund Balance 2,081,026 (9,116,112) 4,262,172 (6,052,796) (3,244,095) Ending Fund Balance 17,386,049 6,188,911 21,648,220 11,333,253 18,404,125

Sonoma County Transportation AuthorityMeasure M FY 2017-2018 Final Budget

Local Street Projects (LSP - 20%)

J:\SCTA Staff\Budget\FY17-18\FY17-18 Final Budget\MM Final Budget FY17-18.xlsx LSP 9/25/2017 5:19 AM129

Dept ID: 70030400Fund 74654

Actual Budgeted Actual Final FinalAccount Description FY 15-16 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 16-17 FY 17-18

40301 Sales/Use Tax 496,440 814,596 1,226,372 1,106,704 1,462,995 42358 State - Caltrans 409,810 561,000 1,241,691 1,155,000 345,000 42601 County - 369,000 - - - 42612 City of Petaluma - 1,610,000 - 263,000 50,000 44002 Interest on Pooled Cash 127,309 55,969 189,394 76,234 120,000 46200 Prior Year Revenue - - - - 46203 Prior Year Revenue - State 119,000 - 30,266 -

Total Revenue 1,152,558 3,410,565 2,687,724 2,600,938 1,977,995

51201 Administration Costs 9,194 10,000 5,931 12,000 12,000 51207 Fiscal Accounting - 5,000 - - 51211 Legal Services 14,362 100,000 9,363 100,000 100,000 51226 Consultants * 472,897 800,000 544,466 1,000,000 800,000 51241 Outside Printing Services - 500 - 500 500 51249 SCTA Staff Time 149,500 160,000 230,992 225,000 215,000 51301 Public/Legal Notices - 250 - - - 51602 Travel Expense 413 10,000 259 10,000 10,000 52101 Misc Expense 900 1,000 66 600 600 52111 Office Expense - - - - 52115 Books/Periodicals - 500 - - 52117 Postage - 2,000 28 2,000 2,000 52162 Conservation Credits - 15,000 - 15,000 15,000 53501 Contributions to Other Govts 16,379 2,000,000 - 500,000 6,000,000 57011 Transfers Out - Within a fund 788,671 - - - 59002 Advances - - - -

Total Expenses 1,452,316 3,104,250 791,105 1,865,100 7,155,100

Beginning Fund Balance 15,284,571 15,284,571 15,246,842 15,246,842 17,222,356 Revenues 1,152,558 3,410,565 2,687,724 2,600,938 1,977,995 Expenses (1,452,316) (3,104,250) (791,105) (1,865,100) (7,155,100) Adjustments 262,029 78,895 7,000,000 Change in EncumbrancesChange in Fund Balance (37,729) 306,315 1,975,514 735,838 1,822,895 Ending Fund Balance 15,246,842 15,590,886 17,222,356 15,982,680 19,045,251

Sonoma County Transportation AuthorityMeasure M FY 2017-2018 Final Budget

Highway 101 (40%)

J:\SCTA Staff\Budget\FY17-18\FY17-18 Final Budget\MM Final Budget FY17-18.xlsx HWY 101 9/25/2017 5:19 AM130

Dept ID: 70030900Fund 74659

Actual Budgeted Actual Final FinalAccount Description FY 15-16 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 16-17 FY 17-18

40301 Sales/Use Tax 2,228,662 2,201,784 2,237,644 2,205,097 2,204,916 44002 Interest on Pooled Cash - - - - 44003 Other Interest Earnings - - - - 47101 Transfer in within a Fund - - - -

Total Revenue 2,228,662 2,201,784 2,237,644 2,205,097 2,204,916

53101 Bond - Principal Payments 1,436,250 1,436,250 1,511,250 1,512,250 1,583,500 53103 Bond - Interest Payments 765,534 765,535 691,847 692,847 623,415

Total Expenses 2,201,784 2,201,785 2,203,097 2,205,097 2,206,915

Beginning Fund Balance 1,288,969 1,288,969 1,315,846 1,315,846 1,350,393 Revenues 2,228,662 2,201,784 2,237,644 2,205,097 2,204,916 Expenses (2,201,784) (2,201,785) (2,203,097) (2,205,097) (2,206,915) AdjustmentsChange in EncumbrancesChange in Fund Balance 26,877 (1) 34,547 - (1,999) Ending Fund Balance 1,315,846 1,288,968 1,350,393 1,315,846 1,348,394

Sonoma County Transportation AuthorityMeasure M FY 2017-2018 Final Budget

Highway 101 2011 Series Bonds - Debt Service Fund

J:\SCTA Staff\Budget\FY17-18\FY17-18 Final Budget\MM Final Budget FY17-18.xlsx HWY 101 2011 Bonds Debt 9/25/2017 5:19 AM131

Dept ID: 70031000Fund 74660

Actual Budgeted Actual Final FinalAccount Description FY 15-16 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 16-17 FY 17-18

40301 Sales/Use Tax 2,156,104 2,151,871 2,252,527 2,220,787 2,320,103 44002 Interest on Pooled Cash 2,832 1,490 4,685 3,000 3,000

- Total Revenue 2,158,936 2,153,361 2,257,212 2,223,787 2,323,103

52101 Misc Expense 225 150 17 300 300 53501 Contributions to Other Govts. 2,202,292 2,451,138 2,298,907 2,527,403 2,635,538

Total Expenses 2,202,517 2,451,288 2,298,923 2,527,703 2,635,838

Beginning Fund Balance 297,927 297,927 303,916 303,916 312,735 Revenues 2,158,936 2,153,361 2,257,212 2,223,787 2,323,103 Expenses (2,202,517) (2,451,288) (2,298,923) (2,527,703) (2,635,838) Adjustments 49,570 50,530 Change in EncumbrancesChange in Fund Balance 5,989 (297,927) 8,819 (303,916) (312,735) Ending Fund Balance 303,916 - 312,735 0 (0)

Sonoma County Transportation AuthorityMeasure M FY 2017-2018 Final Budget

Transit (10%)

J:\SCTA Staff\Budget\FY17-18\FY17-18 Final Budget\MM Final Budget FY17-18.xlsx Transit 9/25/2017 5:19 AM132

Dept ID: 70031100Fund 74661

Actual Budgeted Actual Final FinalAccount Description FY 15-16 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 16-17 FY 17-18

40301 Sales/Use Tax 337,522 342,008 380,382 372,274 425,079 44002 Interest on Pooled Cash 7,445 (10,570) 9,129 8,000 10,000

Total Revenue 344,967 331,438 389,511 380,274 435,079

51201 Administration Costs 1,681 800 344 2,000 2,000 51207 Fiscal Accounting - 500 - - 52101 Misc Expense 112 80 8 80 80 53101 Bond - Principal Payments - - - - 53103 Bond - Interest Payments 17,510 - 18,987 - 53104 Other Interest Expense 19,000 - 19,000 20,000 59002 Advances 450,000 500,000 400,000 400,000 410,000 59003 Advances Clearing (450,000) (500,000) (400,000) (400,000) (410,000)

Total Expenses 19,304 20,380 19,339 21,080 22,080

Beginning Fund Balance 185,913 185,913 36,361 36,361 31,798 Revenues 344,967 331,438 389,511 380,274 435,079 Expenses (19,304) (20,380) (19,339) (21,080) (22,080) Adjustments (475,215) (374,735) (400,000) (410,000) Change in EncumbrancesChange in Fund Balance (149,552) 311,058 (4,563) (40,806) 2,999 Ending Fund Balance 36,361 496,971 31,798 (4,445) 34,798

Sonoma County Transportation AuthorityMeasure M FY 2017-2018 Final Budget

Passenger Rail (5%)

J:\SCTA Staff\Budget\FY17-18\FY17-18 Final Budget\MM Final Budget FY17-18.xlsx Rail 9/25/2017 5:19 AM133

Dept ID: 70031400Fund 74664

Actual Budgeted Actual Final FinalAccount Description FY 15-16 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 16-17 FY 17-18

40301 Sales/Use Tax 738,827 733,928 745,881 736,366 734,972 44002 Interest on Pooled Cash - - - - 47101 Transfer in within a Fund - - - - -

Total Revenue 738,827 733,928 745,881 736,366 734,972

53101 Bond - Principal Payments 478,750 478,750 503,750 504,750 528,500 53103 Bond - Interest Payments 255,178 255,179 230,616 231,616 208,472

Total Expenses 733,928 733,929 734,366 736,366 736,972

Beginning Fund Balance 433,717 433,717 438,616 438,616 450,131 Revenues 738,827 733,928 745,881 736,366 734,972 Expenses (733,928) (733,929) (734,366) (736,366) (736,972) AdjustmentsChange in EncumbrancesChange in Fund Balance 4,899 (1) 11,515 - (2,000) Ending Fund Balance 438,616 433,716 450,131 438,616 448,131

Sonoma County Transportation AuthorityMeasure M FY 2017-2018 Final Budget

Passenger Rail 2011 Bond Debt Service

J:\SCTA Staff\Budget\FY17-18\FY17-18 Final Budget\MM Final Budget FY17-18.xlsx Rail 2011 Bonds Debt 9/25/2017 5:19 AM134

Dept ID: 70031500Fund 74665

Actual Budgeted Actual Final FinalAccount Description FY 15-16 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 16-17 FY 17-18

40301 Sales/Use Tax 862,441 860,748 901,011 888,315 928,041 44002 Interest on Pooled Cash 2,588 32 8,934 2,000 6,500 49002 Advances - - - - 49003 Advances (clearing) - - - -

Total Revenue 865,029 860,780 909,945 890,315 934,541

51226 Consultants - - - - 290,000 51249 SCTA Staff Time - - - - 10,000 52101 Misc Expense 90 60 7 60 60 53103 Bond - Interest Payments - - - - - 53104 Other Interest Expense - 5,000 - - - 53501 Contributions to Other Govts. 341,083 1,533,000 253,960 1,300,000 1,330,000

Total Expenses 341,173 1,538,060 253,967 1,300,060 1,630,060

Beginning Fund Balance 6,346 6,346 550,030 550,030 1,226,220 Revenues 865,029 860,780 909,945 890,315 934,541 Expenses (341,173) (1,538,060) (253,967) (1,300,060) (1,630,060) Adjustments 19,828 20,212 Change in EncumbrancesChange in Fund Balance 543,684 (677,280) 676,190 (409,745) (695,519) Ending Fund Balance 550,030 (670,934) 1,226,220 140,285 530,701

Sonoma County Transportation AuthorityMeasure M FY 2017-2018 Final Budget

Bicycle/Pedestrian (4%)

J:\SCTA Staff\Budget\FY17-18\FY17-18 Final Budget\MM Final Budget FY17-18.xlsx Bike & Ped 9/25/2017 5:19 AM135

Dept ID: 70031600 Refunding of 2008 Bond - No New MoneyFund 74666

Actual Budgeted Actual Final FinalAccount Description FY 15-16 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 16-17 FY 17-18

40301 Sales/Use Tax 3,906,433 4,311,107 4,252,342 4,312,100 4,307,500 44003 Interest Earned 189 - 4,434 - 47101 Transfer in within a Fund 707,587 - -

Total Revenue 4,614,210 4,311,107 4,256,775 4,312,100 4,307,500

53101 Bond - Principal Payments 2,910,000 2,910,000 2,860,000 2,861,000 2,961,000 53103 Bond - Interest Payments 1,401,107 1,401,107 1,450,100 1,451,100 1,348,500

Total Expenses 4,311,107 4,311,107 4,310,100 4,312,100 4,309,500

Beginning Fund Balance 2,088,536 2,088,536 2,391,639 2,391,639 2,461,539 Revenues 4,614,210 4,311,107 4,256,775 4,312,100 4,307,500 Expenses (4,311,107) (4,311,107) (4,310,100) (4,312,100) (4,309,500) Adjustments 123,225 Change in EncumbrancesChange in Fund Balance 303,103 - 69,900 - (2,000) Ending Fund Balance 2,391,639 2,088,536 2,461,539 2,391,639 2,459,539

Sonoma County Transportation AuthorityMeasure M FY 2017-2018 Final Budget

Highway 101 2015A Series Bonds Debt Service Fund

J:\SCTA Staff\Budget\FY17-18\FY17-18 Final Budget\MM Final Budget FY17-18.xlsx HWY 101 2015A Bonds Debt 9/25/2017 5:19 AM136

Dept ID: 70031700 Escrow Account with Trustee for Payoff of 2008 Bond – Callable December 1, 2017Fund 74667

Actual Budgeted Actual Final FinalAccount Description FY 15-16 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 16-17 FY 17-18

47101 Transfer in within a Fund - - - - 47111 Bond Proceeds - - - - 47112 Bond-Premium - - - -

Total Revenue - - - - -

53101 Bond - Principle Payments53105 Debt Issuance 476 1,000 - - 57011 Transfers out within a Fund 21,084 21,084 - - 57101 Other Financing Uses

Total Expenses 21,559 22,084 - - -

Beginning Fund Balance 21,559 21,559 (0) (0) (0) Revenues - - - - - Expenses (21,559) (22,084) - - - Adjustments - - - - - Change in Encumbrances - - - - - Change in Fund Balance (21,559) (22,084) - - - Ending Fund Balance (0) (525) (0) (0) (0)

Sonoma County Transportation AuthorityMeasure M FY 2017-2018 Final Budget

Highway 101 2015A Series Bonds

J:\SCTA Staff\Budget\FY17-18\FY17-18 Final Budget\MM Final Budget FY17-18.xlsx HWY 101 2015A Bond Iss 9/25/2017 5:19 AM137

Dept ID: 70031800Fund 74668

Actual Budgeted Actual Final FinalAccount Description FY 15-16 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 16-17 FY 17-18

40301 Sales/Use Tax 1,994,583 1,280,000 1,293,750 1,261,000 1,305,000 47101 Transfers In- Within a Fund 81,083 - - 47112 Premiums - -

Total Revenue 2,075,667 1,280,000 1,293,750 1,261,000 1,305,000

53101 Bond - Principal Payments 1,280,000 1,280,000 1,260,000 1,261,000 1,306,000 53103 Bond - Interest Payments 617,257 617,257 638,850 639,850 594,625

Total Expenses 1,897,257 1,897,257 1,898,850 1,900,850 1,900,625

Beginning Fund Balance 2,358,996 2,358,996 2,537,406 2,537,406 1,932,306 Revenues 2,075,667 1,280,000 1,293,750 1,261,000 1,305,000 Expenses (1,897,257) (1,897,257) (1,898,850) (1,900,850) (1,900,625) AdjustmentsChange in EncumbrancesChange in Fund Balance 178,410 (617,257) (605,100) (639,850) (595,625) Ending Fund Balance 2,537,406 1,741,739 1,932,306 1,897,556 1,336,681

Sonoma County Transportation AuthorityMeasure M FY 2017-2018 Final Budget

Highway 101 2015B Series Bonds Debt Service Fund

J:\SCTA Staff\Budget\FY17-18\FY17-18 Final Budget\MM Final Budget FY17-18.xlsx HWY 101 2015B Bonds Debt 9/25/2017 5:19 AM138

Dept ID: 70031900Fund 74669

Actual Budgeted Actual Final FinalAccount Description FY 15-16 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 16-17 FY 17-18

40301 Sales/Use Tax - - - - 44002 Interest on Pooled Cash 66,954 48,574 68,152 50,000 50,000 44003 Interest Earned - - - - 46203 PY Intergovmntl Rev - State 36,804 - 47101 Transfers In - Within a Fund 21,084 21,084 - - 47111 Bond Proceeds - - - -

Total Revenue 88,037 69,658 104,956 50,000 50,000

51211 Legal Services 241,151 510,000 5,519 100,000 100,000 51226 Consultants* 24,676 807,000 276,270 1,000,000 1,000,000 53105 Debt Issuance 214 1,000 - - 53501 Contributions to Other Govts 2,758,671 8,445,464 402,577 4,400,000 6,000,000 57011 Transfers out within a Fund - - - -

Total Expenses 3,024,711 9,763,464 684,365 5,500,000 7,100,000

Beginning Fund Balance 9,714,890 9,714,890 6,778,216 6,778,216 6,198,807 Revenues 88,037 69,658 104,956 50,000 50,000 Expenses (3,024,711) (9,763,464) (684,365) (5,500,000) (7,100,000) AdjustmentsChange in EncumbrancesChange in Fund Balance (2,936,674) (9,693,806) (579,409) (5,450,000) (7,050,000) Ending Fund Balance 6,778,216 21,084 6,198,807 1,328,216 (851,193)

Sonoma County Transportation AuthorityMeasure M FY 2017-2018 Final Budget

Highway 101 2015B Series Bonds

J:\SCTA Staff\Budget\FY17-18\FY17-18 Final Budget\MM Final Budget FY17-18.xlsx HWY 101 2015B Bond Iss 9/25/2017 5:19 AM139

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: SCTA Directors

From: Suzanne Smith, Executive Director

Item: 4.6.2 – FY17/18 Transportation Fund for Clean Air Final Budget

Date: October 9, 2017

Issue:

Shall the SCTA adopt a final budget for the Transportation Fund for Clean Air program for FY17/18?

Background:

By October of each year, the SCTA must adopt three final budgets in order for operations to continue. The three budgets cover the SCTA operations, Measure M and the Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA).

This staff report covers the FY17/18 TFCA Final Budget. As is customary, the budget includes revenue from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and the programmed funds available to each jurisdiction. The projects included in the FY17/18 budget are the same projects approved by the SCTA in May 2017. The funds allocated for each project are then assigned to each jurisdiction in which the project is proposed.

Policy Impacts:

None

Fiscal Impacts:

If a final budget is not adopted funds cannot be reimbursed to jurisdictions that expended money on projects and that could result in project delays, cash flow problems or related issues.

Staff Recommendation:

The SCTA must adopt the FY17/18 TFCA Final Budget by October 31, 2017. The SCTA should consider the proposed TFCA Final Budget and if it meets with the Board’s approval, adopt the FY17/18 TFCA Final Budget.

Adoption of Resolution No. 2017-027 adopting the FY17/18 TFCA Final Budget requires a 2/3-majority vote. Therefore, the budget MUST receive eight (8) affirmative votes to pass.

140

SCTA Resolution Number 2017-027 Sonoma County Transportation Authority

Santa Rosa, California October 9, 2017

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SONOMA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, COUNTY OF SONOMA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE TRANSPORTATION FUND FOR CLEAN AIR FINAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017/2018.

WHEREAS, a Transportation Fund for Clean Air Final Budget for Fiscal Year 2017/2018 has been prepared by the Executive Director, reviewed by the Sonoma County Transportation Authority and attached as Exhibit A; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Transportation Fund for Clean Air Final Budget for Fiscal Year 2017/2018 for the Sonoma County Transportation Authority, attached hereto and marked Exhibit A, is hereby adopted.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Executive Director, acting as Clerk of the Authority, shall deliver a certified copy of this resolution to the Sonoma County Auditor-Controller.

THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was moved by Director ___, seconded by Director ___, and approved by the following vote:

Director Agrimonti Director Mansell Director Coursey Director Miller Director Gorin Director Rabbitt Director Gurney Director Russell Director Landman Director Salmon Director Mackenzie Director Zane

Ayes: ____ Noes: __ Absent: __ Abstain: __ SO ORDERED I, the undersigned, certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Sonoma County Transportation Authority held on October 9, 2017. ______________________________________ Suzanne Smith, Executive Director Clerk, Sonoma County Transportation Authority

141

Exhibit A

Budgeted Actual Budgeted Actuals Final Amount of Percent

2015-16 2015-16 2016-17 2016-17 2017-18 Change Change

Revenues

Interest on Pooled Cash 5,700 5,193 5,630 6,548 5,082 548 8.37%

TFCA Funds 594,401 614,093 608,412 614,042 644,505 (36,093) -5.88%

Prior Year Revenue - - - 17,894 6,568 (6,568) -36.71%

Total 600,101 619,286 614,042 638,484 656,155 (42,113) -6.60%

Expenditures

Administration Costs 29,348 22,779 29,536 29,645 40,156 (10,620) -35.82%

Legal Services 115 116 115 - 125 (10) N/A

Distribution to Cities 424,739 244,918 443,125 162,228 377,331 65,794 40.56%

Distribution to County Agencies 140,199 65,189 141,265 - 238,543 (27,278) N/A

Total 594,401 333,002 614,041 191,874 656,155 27,886 14.53%

Prior Year Expenditures

Distribution to Cities & County Agencies 666,048 494,248 393,594 235,112 598,375 (204,781) -87.10%

Total 666,048 494,248 393,594 235,112 598,375 (204,781) -87.10%

Starting Fund Balance 562,200 562,200 112,329 112,329 171,771 (59,442)

Total Revenue 600,101 619,286 614,042 638,484 656,155 (42,113) -6.60%

Total Expenditures (1,260,450) (827,251) (1,007,635) (426,986) (1,254,530) 176,895 -41.43%

Less Change in Encumbrances - (241,906) - (152,056) 545,650 -

Change in Unreserved Fund Balance (660,349) (449,871) (393,593) 59,442 (52,724) 134,781

UNRESERVED FUND BALANCE (98,149) 112,329 (281,264) 171,771 119,047 75,339

Sonoma County Transportation Authority - TFCA Program

FY17/18 Final Budget

Fund 74551

142

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: Regional Climate Protection Authority

From: Lauren Casey, Director of Climate Programs

Item: 4.6.3 – FY17/18 Final Budget for RCPA

Date: October 9, 2017

Issue:

Shall the Board adopt a final budget for RCPA for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2017?

Background:

By October of each year, the RCPA must approve a Final Budget in order for operations to continue.

This staff report describes the FY17/18 RCPA Final Budget (Exhibit A). As is customary, the budget includes all revenues from local, regional, state, and federal sources, as well as all anticipated expenditures. Prior year information is included in the form of actual revenues and expenditures from FY16/17.

REVENUE AND REIMBURSEMENTS IN THE RCPA FY16/17 FINAL BUDGET INCLUDE:

• Interest on Pooled Cash / Interest Charges

Interest budgeted in FY17/18 is $1,800.

• Federal Contributions

No federal contributions are expected in FY17/18.

• City and County Contributions: RCPA Members

RCPA members contribute funding to support the non-grant funded activities which relate to agency operations, member coordination, on-call assistance to Directors and jurisdictional staff, new program development and grant applications, data collection and reporting, and legislative advocacy.

The Final Budget reflects no change to local member contributions from those approved in May, which were held flat at the same level as FY16/17 contributions. The 2017 contribution from RCPA Members is $222,534 (Exhibit B), with each contributing a minimum of $5,000 and the remainder based on population. All local contributions for FY17/18 have been received.

• Other Government Contributions: Bay Area Regional Energy Network and Regional Partnerships

The RCPA participates in a regional energy efficiency program implementation effort, administered by the Association of Bay Area Governments as the Bay Area Regional Energy Network, or BayREN. The RCPA was granted $408,700 for calendar year 2017 for the administration of the BayREN Water Bill Savings Program based on the local Pay As You Save (PAYS) program in Windsor (including technical consultants), coordination with BayREN members, and the local implementation of regional programs including Energy Upgrade California, Bay Area Multifamily Buildings Enhancement program, building codes and standards work, and

143

commercial PACE marketing. Slightly more than half of this budget remained for work in the first two quarters of FY17/18, and ABAG expects that counties are funded at a similar level in 2018. The total forecast revenue from BayREN in FY17/18 for reimbursable efforts is expected to be $410,000.

In addition to contributions from member jurisdictions, the RCPA receives support from local partner agencies who share overlapping missions and collaborate with the RCPA on project delivery, including the Sonoma County Water Agency, the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District, and Sonoma Clean Power. Since the Preliminary budget was adopted, both of the regional air districts that serve Sonoma County have offered funding to establish formal partnerships and increase coordination on the implementation of clean air programs. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District and the Northern Sonoma County Air Pollution Control District have become funding partners to the RCPA.

Final partner contributions from these regional agencies are also outlined in Exhibit B, and the Final Budget includes additional revenue of $50,000 from local partners for services provided by the RCPA related to electric vehicle planning.

• State Grants

The RCPA and SCTA secured funding through a Zero-Emission Vehicle Regional Readiness and Planning solicitation from the California Energy Commission (CEC) to fund projects that support new and existing planning efforts for zero-emission vehicles including electric vehicles. The RCPA was awarded $300,000 to be spent over two years for the implementation of local readiness strategies including the creation of an EV ombudsman, populating a local DriveEV.org web resource, supporting jurisdictions in implementing streamlined permitting requirements, developing a candidate charging stations site database, and conducting employer outreach. Total revenue projected from the in FY17/18 is $135,000.

EXPENDITURES IN THE RCPA FY 16/17 FINAL BUDGET INCLUDE:

• Staff Salaries and Benefits

RCPA staff includes a full time Director of Climate Programs, a full time Climate Action Coordinator, and part of the Executive Director, Community Affairs Specialist, and several administrative positions. These employees manage programs, coordinate with partners (staff and directors), write grants, administer contracts, and engage with members of the community on climate action programs and issues.

The increase in staff costs from the FY16/17 budget is due primarily to the addition of a new administrative position midway through 2016, increases in staff salary and benefit costs, and to the winding down of an SCTA project on which RCPA staff were working (the Shift Sonoma County project was a joint project of the SCTA/RCPA, but the SCTA was the grant recipient and none of the labor costs appear in the RCPA budget). Health and retirement benefits are provided through the County of Sonoma and paid for by the RCPA.

The amount reflected in the budget, $460,000, is the cost of staffing exclusive of the remaining Shift grant efforts on which RCPA staff also work.

• Outside Contracts/Services

Items considered outside contracts or services include staff time as explained above, as well as: the annual audit services; county services such as financial management, claims processing, budget preparation and general accounting; consultant contracts for support on the delivery of Bay Area Regional Energy Network (BayREN) energy efficiency programs; and legal counsel. The addition of a CivicSpark Fellow to RCPA staff in FY17/18 is provided for by a contract with the Local Government Commission. The increase in legal costs from FY16/17 is due primarily to an agreement reached with California River Watch to not appeal and adverse trial

144

court ruling regarding RCPA certification of the Climate Action 2020 and Beyond EIR, and to additional support requested from county counsel in negotiating the agreement.

The total budget for FY17/18 for outside contracts/services, excluding staff, is $490,135.

• Operational Expenses

Items considered operational expenses include office supplies, office lease, printing, postage, insurance, travel, staff development, event registrations, organizational memberships, and other related categories. The total amount requested for these items in the FY17/18 budget is $79,950.

Policy Impacts:

Adoption of the RCPA budget for FY17/18 will establish program activity levels and the ability to deliver on the RCPA’s Mission, Goals, and Objectives.

Fiscal Impacts:

RCPA members are being asked to continue their support of RCPA at $222,534. Also, revenue is forecast to exceed expenses by $9,239 resulting in a slight increase in ending fund balance, forecast to be $247,248 by the end of FY17/18.

Staff Recommendation:

In order to continue operation, the RCPA must adopt a Final Budget for FY17/18 by October 31, 2017. The RCPA should consider the proposed RCPA Final Budget and if it meets with the Board’s approval, adopt the FY17/18 RCPA Final Budget.

Adoption of Resolution No. 2017-004 adopting the FY17/18 RCPA Final Budget requires a 2/3-majority vote. Therefore, the budget MUST receive eight (8) affirmative votes to pass.

145

RCPA Resolution Number 2017-004 Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority

Santa Rosa, California October 9, 2017

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SONOMA COUNTY REGIONAL CLIMATE PROTECTION AUTHORITY, COUNTY OF SONOMA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A FINAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017/2018.

WHEREAS, a Final Budget for Fiscal Year 2017/2018 has been prepared by the Executive Director, reviewed by the Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority and attached as Exhibit A; and

WHEREAS, the Final Budget for Fiscal Year 2017/2018 includes a contribution from the Cities and County partnering agencies for work associated with the Regional Climate Protection Coordination Plan effort, attached hereto as Exhibit B.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Fiscal Year 2017/2018 Final Budget for the Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority, attached hereto and marked Exhibit A, is hereby adopted.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Cities and County of Sonoma partnering agencies will contribute revenue as described in Exhibit B, payable by the first day in July of the Fiscal Year 2017/2018 to the Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Executive Director, acting as Clerk of the Authority, shall deliver a certified copy of this resolution to the Sonoma County Auditor-Controller.

THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was moved by Director ___, seconded by Director ___, and approved by the following vote:

Director Agrimonti Director Mansell Director Coursey Director Miller Director Gorin Director Rabbitt Director Gurney Director Russell Director Landman Director Salmon Director Mackenzie Director Zane

Ayes: ____ Noes: __ Absent: __ Abstain: __ SO ORDERED I, the undersigned, certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Sonoma County Regional Protection Authority held on October 9, 2017. ______________________________________ Suzanne Smith, Executive Director Clerk, Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority

146

Exhibit A

Actual Final Actual Final Final Amount of Percent

2015-16 2015-16 2016-17 2016-17 2017-18 Change Change

Revenues

Federal - - - - - - N/A

County 130,827 130,827 56,820 56,820 56,838 17.98 0.03%

Other Governments 436,551 477,000 566,156 574,000 680,000 106,000.00 15.59%

Cities 83,139 83,138 165,713 165,714 165,686 (28.00) -0.02%

Interest 1,685 1,000 2,950 1,400 1,800 400.00 22.22%

State Grants 288,246 79,000 - - 135,000 135,000.00 100.00%

Donations/ Reimbursements 31 - - - - - N/A

Revenue Applic to PY 2,547 - - - - - N/A

TOTAL REVENUES 943,025 770,965 791,639 797,934 1,039,324 241,389.98 23%

Expenditures

Outside Contracts/Services

Annual Audit 6,974 8,000 6,326 7,000 7,000 - 0.00%

Fiscal Accounting Services 5,560 6,000 5,770 5,150 5,679 529.00 9.32%

Legal Services 24,376 100,000 122,460 100,000 163,456 63,456.00 38.82%

RCPA Staff Time 411,602 305,260 382,339 370,000 460,000 90,000.00 19.57%

Mail Services County - 500 - 500 - (500.00) N/A

County Services 2,174 8,500 1,299 8,500 2,500 (6,000.00) -240.00%

EFS Charges - 8,000 2,500 8,000 1,500 (6,500.00) -433.33%

Contract/Consultant Services 365,481 403,040 260,989 261,000 310,000 49,000.00 15.81%

SUBTOTAL 816,167 839,300 781,684 760,150 950,135 189,985.00 20%

Operational Expenditures

Liablility Insurance 4,293 5,000 4,412 5,000 5,000 - 0.00%

Printing Services 27,454 10,000 789 10,500 12,000 1,500.00 12.50%

Rents/Leases-Bldgs/Imp 6,000 6,000 9,164 26,000 28,000 2,000.00 7.14%

Publications & Legal Notices - - 255 - - - N/A

Travel 10,622 20,000 6,235 20,000 12,000 (8,000.00) -66.67%

Memberships 2,500 7,500 150 7,500 2,650 (4,850.00) -183.02%

Office Supplies 1,362 3,000 1,748 3,000 3,000 - 0.00%

Postage 295 1,000 - 500 - (500.00) N/A

Sponsorships/Public Outreach 6,532 19,200 3,400 10,000 10,000 - 0.00%

Professional Development 1,867 4,000 841 4,000 7,300 3,300.00 45.21%

SUBTOTAL 60,924 75,700 26,995 86,500 79,950 (6,550.00) -8.19%

TOTAL EXPENDITURES 877,092 915,000 808,679 846,650 1,030,085 183,435.00 17.81%

Starting Fund Balance 191,239 191,239 255,049 238,009 238,009

Total Revenue 943,025 770,965 791,639 797,934 1,039,324

Total Expenditures (877,092) (915,000) (808,679) (846,650) (1,030,085)

Adjustments - - - - -

Change in Fund Balance 65,934 (144,035) (17,040) (48,716) 9,239

ENDING FUND BALANCE 257,173 47,204 238,009 189,293 247,248

Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority

Budget Fund #74600

FY 2017-18 Final Budget

RCPA147

Exhibit B

Jurisdiction Population1 Percent Final FY16/17

2 Final FY17/18

Cloverdale 8,825 1.7581% 8,028$ 8,033$

Cotati 7,153 1.4250% 7,554$ 7,459$

Healdsburg 11,699 2.3307% 9,063$ 9,021$

Petaluma 60,375 12.0279% 25,700$ 25,752$

Rohnert Park 42,003 8.3678% 19,281$ 19,437$

Santa Rosa 175,667 34.9963% 65,172$ 65,380$

Sebastopol 7,527 1.4995% 7,610$ 7,587$

Sonoma 10,865 2.1645% 8,801$ 8,735$

Windsor 27,031 5.3851% 14,504$ 14,291$

County 150,814 30.0451% 56,820$ 56,838$

501,959 100.0000% 222,534$ 222,534$ 1 California Department of Finance - January 1, 2016 - Based on published population by entity.2 $5,000 per jurisdiction with the remainder based on population

Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation & Open Space District 25,000$ 30,000$

Sonoma County Water Agency 35,000$ 40,000$

Sonoma Clean Power 35,000$ 40,000$

Northern Sonoma County Air Pollution Control District -$ 30,000$

Bay Area Air Quality Management District -$ 80,000$

Sub Total 95,000$ 220,000$

Grand Total 317,534$ 442,534$

FY2017-18 Local Contribution to RCPA

148

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: SCTA/RCPA Board of Directors

From: Suzanne Smith, Executive Director

Item: 4.6.4 – FY17/18 Final Budget – SCTA Operations

Date: October 9, 2017

Issue:

What is the proposed Final Budget for the SCTA operations for FY17/18?

Background:

By October of each year, the SCTA must adopt three Final Budgets in order for operations to continue. The three budgets cover the SCTA general operations, Measure M and the Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) program.

This staff report covers the FY17/18 SCTA Final Budget. The budget includes all revenues derived from local, regional, state and federal sources. In addition to revenues, all anticipated expenditures are listed in the final budget. Prior year information is included with FY16/17 actual expenditures.

REVENUE IN THE SCTA FY17/18 FINAL BUDGET INCLUDES:

Federal Funding

• Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds from MTC planning contract

The SCTA is eligible to receive federal STP funds through MTC based on a contractual arrangement that includes a specific scope of work related to regional activities plus an additional scope of work with tasks related to transportation and land use planning including the maintenance of the travel demand model and Sustainable Communities Strategy work. For FY17/18, the budget anticipates $950,000. The SCTA remains eligible for the funds as long as it maintains a planning and programming function. This source is critical to fund staff and agency operations and is part of the funding in the One Bay Area Grant cycle two process.

• Carshare and Carpool Programs

The SCTA has received federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funding totaling $143,000 this FY for two programs related to developing a Carshare program in Santa Rosa and supporting carpooling throughout Sonoma County. The funds come from MTC’s Climate Initiatives Program and Regional Carpool Program. The Carshare program funds will be used to subsidize implementation, operations and marketing of a pilot car share program in Santa Rosa. The carpool support program funds will be used to develop a countywide guaranteed ride home program and promote other new and ongoing transportation demand management programs in Sonoma County.

State Funding

• State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) – Planning, Programming & Monitoring (PPM)

149

These funds pay for staffing, office space/supplies, and consultant costs associated with the planning and project management related to the State Highway System and other eligible STIP projects. For FY17/18 SCTA anticipates using $343,000 in PPM funds. This revenue comes to the SCTA on a reimbursement basis from Caltrans.

• Strategic Growth Council (SGC) Grant for Shift Sonoma County

The SCTA received a planning grant from the SGC to address mode shift and fuel shift to reduce GHG emissions from the transportation sector. The final $85,000 available will be spent this fiscal year on staff time, consultant services, legal services and meeting related costs.

• HOV Lane Violation Fines

SCTA began receiving a percentage of the fines collected from HOV lane violations in FY14/15. This relatively new source of revenue is challenging to estimate. So far annual revenue has ranged from $34,000 to $67,000; for FY17/18 the anticipated amount proposed for the budget is $40,000.

• Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) Funds

The SCTA is eligible to receive 6.25% of the TFCA funds to serve as the Program Manager for the TFCA program of projects based on the hours spent managing the program. The SCTA anticipates receiving $40,000 to administer the program for FY17/18. The SCTA will also be using $70,000 in TFCA funds for work on a guaranteed ride home program. This item shows up under Reimbursements and is reflected as a negative expenditure due to the budgeting systems’ handling of payment transfers within an agency.

Local Funding

• The City and County partner contributions

Local jurisdictions contribute to the SCTA based on a population and centerline road mile formula. Population numbers were updated based on Department of Finance figures for 2016 and revised road mile numbers derived from jurisdictions’ Pavement Management System. The total contribution from local jurisdictions as shown in the Preliminary Budget is $372,893

The proposed local contribution from the cities and county reflects a 3% increase over last year. Staff is proposing the increase for FY17/18 to assist in critical SCTA operations that cannot be funded with grant or Measure M funds – including matching State and federal funding. A breakdown of the proposed costs to each jurisdiction is provided.

• Measure M

The SCTA bills directly to projects for SCTA staff time and materials used specifically on Highway 101 projects. The FY17/18 budget reflects $265,000 for staff and materials. This item shows up under Reimbursements and is reflected as a negative expenditure due to the budgeting systems’ handling of payment transfers within an agency.

• RCPA

The RCPA staff is paid for through the SCTA’s budget system and then staff time is reimbursed to SCTA from RCPA. The SCTA budget includes $460,000 in funds from the RCPA to cover staff costs, including a portion of the Executive Director and support staff time. This item shows up under Reimbursements and is reflected as a negative expenditure due to the budgeting systems’ handling of payment transfers within an agency.

150

Revenue Summary: Overall revenue is down slightly for FY17/18 primarily due to the wrap up of the Shift grant, however the new contract with MTC has increased our level of support for regional activities while the amount anticipated from Caltrans has remained flat. Local contributions are up 3% though the budget shows a slight decrease due to an additional $25,000 contribution from the County related to State Route 37.

EXPENDITURES IN THE SCTA FY17/18 FINAL BUDGET INCLUDE:

• Staff Salaries/Benefits

The FY17/18 budget reflects the salaries and benefits for twelve full time positions. The salary and benefit budget totals $2,098,500, up 4% from FY16/17 due to anticipated merit increases and increases in the cost of benefits. Health and retirement benefits are provided through the County of Sonoma and paid for by the SCTA.

• Outside Contracts/Services

This category totals $401,603 and includes annual audit services; financial management, claims processing, payroll, budget preparation and general accounting; contracts for consultant services (transportation model calibration, Carshare, carpool support and related activities); and legal counsel for contract reviews and procedural/operational questions including work on State Route 37.

• Operational Expenses

Items considered operational expenses include computer hardware and software, office supplies, office lease, printing, travel, professional development and other relates categories. The total amount requested for these items is $346,646 and includes funding for an office relocation.

Expenditure Summary: Overall expenditures increase slightly due to salaries/benefits for 12 full time positions and one-time relocation costs.

Policy Impacts:

No new policy issues are proposed in the FY17/18 SCTA Final Budget.

Fiscal Impacts:

The FY17/18 SCTA Final Budget proposes a 3% increase in local contributions that was approved as part of the preliminary budget (an increase of $10,000).

Revenues for the FY17/18 SCTA Final Budget are down due the near completion of the Shift grant. Expenditures are down slightly but include costs related to a possible office relocation, merit increases for employees and consultant services.

Staff Recommendation:

In order to continue operation, the SCTA must adopt a Final Budget for FY17/18 by October 31, 2017. The SCTA should consider the proposed Final SCTA Budget and, if it meets with the Board’s approval, adopt the FY17/18 SCTA Final Budget.

Adoption of Resolution No. 2017-028 adopting the FY17/18 Preliminary Budget requires a 2/3-majority vote. Therefore, the budget MUST receive eight (8) affirmative votes to pass.

151

SCTA Resolution Number 2017-028 Sonoma County Transportation Authority

Santa Rosa, California October 9, 2017

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SONOMA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, COUNTY OF SONOMA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A FINAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017/2018.

WHEREAS, a Final Budget for Fiscal Year 2017/2018 has been prepared by the Executive Director, reviewed by the Sonoma County Transportation Authority and attached as Exhibit A; and

WHEREAS, a Final Budget for Fiscal Year 201/2018 does not include a Cost of Living Adjustment for the SCTA employees; and

WHEREAS, a Final Budget for Fiscal Year 2017/2018 includes a contribution for local jurisdictions based on population/road-mile formula, attached hereto as Exhibit B.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Fiscal Year 2017/2018 Final Budget for the Sonoma County Transportation Authority, attached hereto and marked Exhibit A, is hereby adopted.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Cities and County of Sonoma will contribute revenue as described in Exhibit B payable by the 15th day of November of Fiscal Year 2017/2018 to the Sonoma County Transportation Authority.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Executive Director, acting as Clerk of the Authority, shall deliver a certified copy of this resolution to the Sonoma County Auditor-Controller.

THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was moved by Director ___, seconded by Director ___, and approved by the following vote:

Director Agrimonti Director Mansell Director Coursey Director Miller Director Gorin Director Rabbitt Director Gurney Director Russell Director Landman Director Salmon Director Mackenzie Director Zane

Ayes: ____ Noes: __ Absent: __ Abstain: __ SO ORDERED I, the undersigned, certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Sonoma County Transportation Authority held on October 9, 2017. ______________________________________ Suzanne Smith, Executive Director Clerk, Sonoma County Transportation Authority

152

Actual Budgeted Actual Final Budget Final Amount of Percent

2015-16 2015-16 2016-17 2016-17 2017-18 Change Change

Revenues

Federal - MTC Contract STP 789,381 900,000 766,910 720,000 950,000 230,000 31.94%

Federal - Carshare and Carpool Programs 27,808 35,000 143,000 108,000 308.57%

Federal - Short Range Transit Plan 18,395 20,000 1,603 1,605 - (1,605) -100.00%

State - STIP/PPM 199,768 150,000 305,145 325,000 343,000 18,000 5.54%

State - Shift Grant SGC 369,619 557,000 277,348 438,900 85,000 (353,900) -80.63%

State - HOV Lane Violation Fines 53,794 20,000 55,723 40,000 40,000 - 0.00%

Local Contributions - City & County 351,487 351,488 362,030 387,032 372,893 (14,139) -3.65%

Interest 954 1,000 4,195 1,000 1,000 - 0.00%

Donations/Reimbursements 4,316 - 3,288 2,500 2,500 - 0.00%

Operating Transfers - ISD - - - 11,800 4,540 (7,260) -61.53%

Revenue Appl - PY Intergovernmental/Misc 66,766 - 5 - - - N/A

TOTAL REVENUES 1,854,478 1,999,488 1,804,055 1,962,837 1,941,933 (20,904) -1.06%

Expenditures

Salaries and Benefits

Employee Salary (12 FT positions) 1,159,592 1,157,565 1,229,696 1,210,615 1,294,400 83,785 6.92%

Employee Benefits (12 FT positions) 665,310 680,042 778,305 739,477 804,100 64,623 8.74%

FY16/17 Budget Adjustment for S/B - - - 80,000 - (80,000) -100.00%

SUBTOTAL 1,824,903 1,837,607 2,008,001 2,030,092 2,098,500 68,408 3.37%

Outside Contracts/Services

County Services (mail, EFS, payroll) 16,394 33,000 21,801 31,979 25,679 (6,300) -19.70%

Audit Services 19,305 20,000 22,820 23,800 23,800 - 0.00%

Fiscal Accounting Services 32,791 40,000 29,793 41,200 34,124 (7,076) -17.17%

Legal Services 16,805 15,000 26,797 15,000 25,000 10,000 66.67%

Consultant Services 126,488 300,000 76,559 235,000 293,000 58,000 24.68%

SUBTOTAL 211,782 408,000 177,770 346,979 401,603 54,624 15.74%

Operational Expenditures

Liability Insurance 5,647 8,000 6,755 7,000 8,000 1,000 14.29%

Printing Services/Copier Rental 14,892 15,000 12,982 15,000 14,000 (1,000) -6.67%

Public/Legal Notices - 1,000 1,105 500 1,000 500 100.00%

Rents/Leases-Bldgs 62,650 65,000 61,651 92,600 136,000 43,400 46.87%

Travel/Training 29,843 50,000 31,802 40,000 36,000 (4,000) -10.00%

Telephones 9,952 11,000 10,244 11,600 11,600 - 0.00%

County ISD Computer Support 51,521 60,000 52,054 52,350 54,014 1,664 3.18%

ISD-Computer Replacement Program - 7,000 14,586 17,792 10,532 (7,260) -40.80%

Memberships - - 2,943 - 5,000

Office Supplies / Equipment 8,161 8,000 8,829 8,000 11,000 3,000 37.50%

Subscriptions 2,122 1,000 1,840 2,000 1,500 (500) -25.00%

Postage - - - - - - N/A

Computer Software & Hardware 3,745 5,000 530 5,000 5,000 - 0.00%

Events/Public Outreach 404 10,000 3,760 5,000 5,000 - 0.00%

Professional Development 5,484 20,000 17,489 17,000 18,000 1,000 5.88%

Contribution - Non County (SR37) 22,012 - 14,612 50,000 30,000 (20,000) -40.00%

SUBTOTAL 216,434 261,000 241,183 323,842 346,646 17,804 5.50%

Reimbursements

Reimbursements - Measure M (187,100) (200,000) (272,254) (265,000) (265,000) - 0.00%

Reimbursements - RCPA (411,602) (243,300) (382,339) (368,000) (460,000) (92,000) 25.00%

Reimbursements - TFCA (22,779) (30,000) (29,645) (29,650) (110,000) (80,350) 270.99%

SUBTOTAL (621,482) (473,300) (684,239) (662,650) (835,000) (172,350) 26.01%

TOTAL EXPENDITURES 1,631,636 2,033,307 1,742,715 2,038,263 2,011,749 (31,514) -1.55%

Starting Fund Balance 481,015 481,015 737,093 737,093 797,095 60,002 8.14%

Total Revenue 1,854,478 1,999,488 1,804,055 1,962,837 1,941,933 (20,904) -1.06%

Total Expenditures (1,631,636) (2,033,307) (1,742,715) (2,038,263) (2,011,749) 26,514 -1.30%

Adjustments 33,236 - - -

Change in Fund Balance 256,078 (33,819) 61,339 (75,426) (69,816)

ENDING FUND BALANCE 737,093 447,196 798,432 661,667 727,279

RESTRICTED FUND BALANCE - - 162,332 161,000 1,462,332

TOTAL FUND BALANCE 737,093 447,196 960,764 822,667 2,189,611 -

Sonoma County Transportation Authority

FY17/18 Final Budget - Budget Fund 74501

153

Exhibit B

50% Road Miles1

50% Population2

Cloverdale 1.5519% 5,612$ 5,787$ Cotati 1.1958% 4,429$ 4,459$ Healdsburg 2.1142% 7,698$ 7,884$ Petaluma 9.6036% 34,715$ 35,811$ Rohnert Park 6.1049% 21,926$ 22,765$ Santa Rosa 27.8537% 100,555$ 103,864$ Sebastopol 1.2494% 4,547$ 4,659$ Sonoma 1.7729% 6,556$ 6,611$ Windsor 4.4647% 16,387$ 16,649$ County 44.0890% 159,605$ 164,405$

Total 100.0000% 362,032$ 372,893$

1 Road Mileage (Center Line Miles) as of September 15, 2016.2 California Department of Finance - January 1, 2016 - Based on published population by entity.

Proposed FY17-18 (updated by 3%)

Jurisdiction

FY2017-18 Local Contribution to SCTA

Local Contribution FY16-17

154

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA | 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Transit – Technical Advisory Committee

MEETING AGENDA September 13, 2017 – 10:00 a.m.

Sonoma County Transportation Authority SCTA Large Conference Room

490 Mendocino Avenue, Suite 206 Santa Rosa, California 95401

ITEM

1. Introductions

2. Approval of Meeting Notes: August 9, 2017 – ACTION*

3. Microtransit Demo, TransLoc - Presentation

4. Measure M Reauthorization – Discussion

5. SB1 and STA Funds – Discussion

6. Transit Operator Updates – Discussion

7. Clipper Update – Discussion 7.1. MTC Clipper next generation survey, staff report* 7.2. Clipper retail network update, if available 7.3. Clipper sales update

8. Technology Update (real-time information, AVL, passenger counters, fare apps, etc.) – Discussion

9. Other Business / Comments / Announcements

10. Adjourn - ACTION *Materials attached **Materials to be handed out

The next SCTA/RCPA meeting will be held October 9, 2017 The next T-TAC meeting will be held October 11, 2017

DISABLED ACCOMMODATION: If you have a disability that requires the agenda materials to be in an alternate format or that requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this meeting, please contact SCTA/RCPA at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation. SB 343 DOCUMENTS RELATED TO OPEN SESSION AGENDAS: Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Transit-Technical Advisory Committee after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the Sonoma County Transportation Authority office at 490 Mendocino Ave., Suite 206, during normal business hours. Pagers, cellular telephones and all other communication devices should be turned off during the committee meeting to avoid electrical interference with the sound recording system.

TO REDUCE GHG EMISSIONS: Please consider carpooling or taking transit to this meeting. For more information check www.511.org, www.gosonoma.org

155

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA | 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Transit Paratransit Coordinating Committee

MEETING AGENDA September 19, 2017 – 1:30 p.m.

Sonoma County Transportation Authority SCTA Large Conference Room

490 Mendocino Avenue, Suite 206 Santa Rosa, California 95401

ITEM

1. Introductions

2. Approval of Meeting Notes: July 18, 2017 - DISCUSSION / ACTION*

3. ADA Accessibility Specifications for Transportation Vehicles– Discussion* 3.1. Priority Seating Signs on Buses (§38.27) 3.2. Interior Circulation on Buses (§38.29)

4. Roundtable Updates

4.1. Transit / Paratransit Operators

4.2. Mobility Partners

5. Public Comment

6. Other Business / Comments / Announcements

7. Adjourn - ACTION

*Materials attached **Materials to be handed out

The next SCTA/RCPA meeting will be held October 9, 2017 The next TPCC meeting will be held November 21, 2017

Copies of the full Agenda Packet are available at www.scta.ca.gov.

DISABLED ACCOMMODATION: If you have a disability that requires the agenda materials to be in an alternate format or that requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this meeting, please contact SCTA at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation.

SB 343 DOCUMENTS RELATED TO OPEN SESSION AGENDAS: Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Transit Paratransit Coordinating Committee after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the Sonoma County Transportation Authority office at 490 Mendocino Ave., Suite 206, during normal business hours.

Pagers, cellular telephones and all other communication devices should be turned off during the committee meeting to avoid electrical interference with the sound recording system.

156

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA | 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Planning Advisory Committee September Updates No Meeting in September – Next meeting 10/19/17

I. CLIMATE ACTION 2020 - RESOLUTION OF LITIGATION

The RCPA developed the Climate Action 2020 and Beyond plan last year to comply with state legislation to try to reduce greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by the year 2020. All nine Sonoma County cities and the county worked to develop the plan’s goals. Implementation was put on hold while a lawsuit against the adequacy of the EIR was supported in court. The trial court issued an adverse ruling, which would require the RCPA to appeal or rescind certification of the EIR. The SCTA/RCPA authorized counsel and the Executive Director to enter into an agreement with California River Watch that will conclude the legal action in which RCPA pays $226,912, comprised of $225,000 in attorney fees and $1,912 in costs, in two installment payments over two years. As further requirements of the settlement, RCPA would agree to not appeal, and California River Watch would reaffirm in signed correspondence on letterhead its commitment not to challenge the measures in the plan. The CAP will remain an advisory document, and RCPA’s member agencies can continue to implement the measures in the plan if they either conduct CEQA review or find that the measures are exempt. The plan will not be able to be used for making significance determinations for CEQA analysis of other projects.

II. SONOMA COUNTY TRAVEL MODEL – UPDATE TO ADMINISTRATIVE AND OPERATIONAL TRAVEL DEMAND MODELING GUIDELINES – FINAL REVISION

SCTA operates and maintains the Sonoma County Travel Model (SCTM) which is used to support SCTA’s transportation planning activities and to provide analytic and modeling support to the Authority’s member organizations. SCTA’s Administrative and Operational Travel Demand Modeling Guidelines are used by staff to guide the operation, maintenance, improvement, and administration of the SCTM. This document outlines the goals and objectives, priorities, scope, products and services, maintenance, improvement, validation, and program evaluation strategies of the SCTA modeling program. A draft update to these guidelines was provided to the PAC, TAC, and CAC for discussion and review in August of 2017. The final document has been revised based on feedback from these committees and staff level review.

http://scta.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/AdminGuidelines-2017-Sept-Update-revised.pdf

http://scta.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/SCTA_RCPAmodeldatarequest.pdf

III. GRANT OPPORTUNITIES

1. Senate Bill 1 - Caltrans is administering SB 1, with an application deadline of October 20, 2017 for applications. Guidelines and application info at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/grants.html .There are two grant opportunities:

• Transportation Planning Grants ($25 million annually) to encourage local and regional planning that further state goals, including, but not limited to, the goals and best practices cited in the regional transportation plan guidelines adopted by the California Transportation Commission.

157

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA | 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

• Adaptation Planning Grants ($20 million over three years) to local and regional agencies for climate change adaptation planning.

2. 2017 Affordable Housing Sustainable Communities (NOFA expected October 2nd). AHSC Program Guidelines http://sgc.ca.gov/Grant-Programs/AHSC-Guidelines.html

IV. HIGHWAY 37

A series of four informational open houses on the Highway 37 Improvement Plan are being held from September 20 to October 2. The Sonoma meeting is on Thursday, Sept. 28th from 6-8 pm at the Sonoma Veterans Memorial Building 126 First Street West, Sonoma.

The open houses are meant to inform residents and Highway 37 users about the status of the planning process to address impacts from sea-level rise, flooding and increased traffic along the corridor, as well as to provide an opportunity for participants to share their concerns and provide feedback. More information is available online: http://scta.ca.gov/projects/highway37/

V. ZIPCAR IS NOW AVAILABLE IN SANTA ROSA

Residents or employees can sign up for a complimentary annual membership available through a grant from the SCTA. Two Zipcars—a Honda Civic and a Ford Escape—are available for reservation by the hour or by the day with gas, insurance, maintenance and 180 miles of driving included. One is parked near the Downtown Santa Rosa SMART Station and the other is parked at 730 5th Street for. To sign up, visit Zipcar.com/SantaRosa.

VI. SHIFT SONOMA COUNTY

Shift Sonoma County aims to define and evaluate strategies to shift transportation choices away from single occupant vehicles towards cleaner, healthier, and more efficient modes of transportation. The window to provide feedback on the Draft Shift Sonoma County Low Carbon Transportation Action Plan runs through September 17, 2017. The online survey is available at: https://www.placespeak.com/ShiftSonoma. Once you log in, you can complete the survey, suggest locations for clean transportation infrastructure and share what you’re already doing.

Additional information about the plan, including supporting documents and a Spanish translation, is available online at: http://scta.ca.gov/shift. Shift Sonoma County is a project to define and evaluate strategies to shift transportation choices away from single occupant vehicles towards cleaner, healthier, and more efficient modes of transportation. Please let me know if you have any questions and feel free to share this information with others.

VII. BAY AREA PLANNING DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION

Fall 2017 meeting is scheduled for October 13th, 2017 from 8:30am to 1:30pm at Nile Hall, Preservation Park, 668 13th Street, Oakland. The agenda can be found at: http://scta.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/BAPDA-Agenda-October-13-2017.pdf

158

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA | 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Citizens Advisory Committee MEETING AGENDA

September 25, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. Sonoma County Transportation Authority

SCTA Large Conference Room 490 Mendocino Avenue, Suite 206

Santa Rosa, California 95401 ITEM

1. Introductions

2. Public Comment

3. Administrative - Approval of Notes August 28, 2017* - ACTION

4. Measure M – DISCUSSION/ACTION

a. Measure M Projects i. Access across 101 in Windsor – City of Windsor

b. Status of Measure M annual reporting letters*

c. Measure M Financial Reports*

5. Climate Action 2020 – Resolution of Litigation* - DISCUSSION

6. Sonoma County Travel Model – Update to Administrative and Operational Travel Demand Modeling Guidelines – Final Revision http://scta.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/AdminGuidelines-2017-Sept-Update-revised.doc

7. Highway Updates - DISCUSSION

a. Hwy 37 outreach meetings - http://scta.ca.gov/projects/highway37/

8. Zipcar is now available in Santa Rosa - INFORMATION Residents or employees can sign up for a complimentary annual membership available through a grant from the SCTA. Two Zipcars—a Honda Civic and a Ford Escape—are available for reservation by the hour or by the day with gas, insurance, maintenance and 180 miles of driving included. One is parked near the Downtown Santa Rosa SMART Station and the other is parked at 730 5th Street for. To sign up, visit Zipcar.com/SantaRosa.

9. Announcements

10. Adjourn *Materials attached.

The next S C T A meeting will be held October 9, 2017 The next CAC meeting will be held October 30, 2017

159

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA | 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Countywide Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee

MEETING AGENDA September 26, 2017 – 1:30 p.m.

Sonoma County Transportation Authority SCTA Large Conference Room

490 Mendocino Avenue, Suite 206 Santa Rosa, California 95401

ITEM

1. Introductions

2. Approval of Meeting Notes: May 23, 2017 - DISCUSSION / ACTION*

3. Public Comment

4. Caltrans District 4 Bicycle Plan Update – Discussion

5. Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Project List and Map Update 2017, Staff Report – Discussion*

6. Roundtable updates – Discussion

7. Regional Events/Opportunities - Discussion 7.1. MTC Complete Streets Workshops – October 5 and 11– Details and Registration: http://bit.ly/2f132W8 7.2. BAAQMD Bike Parking Interest Survey: http://bit.ly/2hgWpQ5

8. Articles of Interest – Information 8.1. These Temporary Bike Lan Barriers Let Cities Experiment With Better Biking Infrastructure, Fast

Company - https://www.fastcompany.com/40459179/these-temporary-bike-lane-barriers-let-cities-experiment-with-better-biking-infrastructure

9. Other Business / Comments / Announcements

10. Adjourn – ACTION

*Materials attached **Materials to be handed out

The next SCTA/RCPA meeting will be held October 9, 2017 The next CBPAC meeting will be held November 28, 2017

Copies of the full Agenda Packet are available at www.scta.ca.gov

DISABLED ACCOMMODATION: If you have a disability that requires the agenda materials to be in an alternate format or that requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this meeting, please contact SCTA/RCPA at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation. SB 343 DOCUMENTS RELATED TO OPEN SESSION AGENDAS: Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the COUNTYWIDE BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the Sonoma County Transportation Authority office at 490 Mendocino Ave., Suite 206, during normal business hours.

Pagers, cellular telephones and all other communication devices should be turned off during the committee meeting to avoid electrical interference with the sound recording system. TO REDUCE GHG EMISSIONS: Please consider carpooling or taking transit to this meeting. For more information check www.511.org, www.srcity.org/citybus, www.sctransit.com or https://carmacarpool.com/sfbay

160

490 Mendocino Ave. #206, Santa Rosa, CA | 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Technical Advisory Committee

MEETING AGENDA SCTA Headquarters Office

2September 28, 2017 – 1:30 p.m. Sonoma County Transportation Authority

Large Conference Room 490 Mendocino Avenue, Suite 206

Santa Rosa, California 95401 ITEM

1. Introductions

2. Public Comment

3. Approval of Minutes, August 24, 2017*

4. Measure M DISCUSSION / ACTION

4.1. Measure M Invoicing/Obligation Status*

4.2. Measure M Annual Reporting Letter Status Update*

5. Regional Information Update DISCUSSION / ACTION

5.1 Regional Informational Items*

5.2 SB-1 Local Streets and Roads Funding Reporting Guidelines Approved: http://catc.ca.gov/programs/SB_1/081717_Final_LSR_Program_Reporting_Guidelines.pdf

List of Projects due to CTC on October 16, 2017

5.2a Department of Finance SB-1 Maintenance of Effort letters sent to local jurisdictions

5.2b Local Streets and Roads Revenue Estimates for FY16/17, 17/18 and 18/19 (May11, 2017)* http://californiacityfinance.com/LSR1704.pdf

5.3 Caltrans Update of Corridor System Management Plan (CSMP) for U.S. 101*

6. Sonoma County Travel Model Administrative Guidelines – Final Revision

7. Rail Update DISCUSSION

8. DRAFT SCTA Board Meeting Agenda for September 11, 2017 DISCUSSION

9. Other Business / Comments / Announcements DISCUSSION

10. Adjourn ACTION *Materials attached. **Materials handed out at meeting

The next S C T A meeting will be held October 9th, 2017

The next TAC meeting will be held October 26, 2017

161

Copies of the full Agenda Packet are available at www.sctainfo.org

DISABLED ACCOMMODATION: If you have a disability that requires the agenda materials to be in an alternate format or that requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this meeting, please contact SCTA at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation.

SB 343 DOCUMENTS RELATED TO OPEN SESSION AGENDAS: Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Technical Advisory Committee after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the Sonoma County Transportation Authority office at 490 Mendocino Ave., Suite 206, during normal business hours.

Pagers, cellular telephones and all other communication devices should be turned off during the committee meeting to avoid electrical interference with the sound recording system.

TAC Voting member attendance – (6 Month rolling 2017)

Jurisdiction February March April May July August September

Cloverdale Public Works

Cotati Public Works

County of Sonoma DHS

County of Sonoma PRMD

County of Sonoma Regional Parks

County of Sonoma TPW

Healdsburg Public Works

Petaluma Public Works & Transit

Rohnert Park Public Works

Santa Rosa Public Works

Santa Rosa Transit

Sebastopol Public Works

SMART

Sonoma County Transit

Sonoma Public Works

Windsor Public Works

NB: June meeting was cancelled. November and December meetings fall on or near holidays so a single TAC meeting will be held in early December.

162